Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29244756›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2017

Recent Progress in Biosensors for Environmental Monitoring: A Review.

Celine I L Justino, Armando C Duarte, Teresa A P Rocha-Santos

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

83 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Bacteria as living biosensors for DNA.Nature reviews bioengineering · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

23 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Celine I L JustinoDepartment of Chemistry & CESAM, University of Aveiro, Campus de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal. celinejustino@ua.pt.ORCID 0000-0002-3935-1890
Armando C DuarteDepartment of Chemistry & CESAM, University of Aveiro, Campus de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal. aduarte@ua.pt.ORCID 0000-0002-4868-4099
Teresa A P Rocha-SantosDepartment of Chemistry & CESAM, University of Aveiro, Campus de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-3660-4116

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The environmental monitoring has been one of the priorities at the European and global scale due to the close relationship between the environmental pollution and the human health/socioeconomic development. In this field, the biosensors have been widely employed as cost-effective, fast, in situ, and real-time analytical techniques. The need of portable, rapid, and smart biosensing devices explains the recent development of biosensors with new transduction materials, obtained from nanotechnology, and for multiplexed pollutant detection, involving multidisciplinary experts. This review article provides an update on recent progress in biosensors for the monitoring of air, water, and soil pollutants in real conditions such as pesticides, potentially toxic elements, and small organic molecules including toxins and endocrine disrupting chemicals.

Indexed as

Biosensing TechniquesEnvironmental MonitoringEnvironmental PollutantsHumansNanotechnologyPesticidesEnvironmental PollutantsPesticidesantibodiesaptamersbiosensorsenvironmental monitoringenzymespesticidespollutants

Identifiers

PMID29244756
PMCPMC5750672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.