ReviewMicromachines2018
Particle Manipulation by Optical Forces in Microfluidic Devices.
Review in Micromachines, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Review of Research Progress in Microfluidic Bioseparation and Bioassay.Micromachines · 2024Review
- Constrained Volume Micro- and Nanoparticle Collection Methods in Microfluidic Systems.Micromachines · 2024Review
- Lab-on-a-Chip Platforms for Airborne Particulate Matter Applications: A Review of Current Perspectives.Biosensors · 2022Review
- Hand-Powered Inertial Microfluidic Syringe-Tip Centrifuge.Biosensors · 2021Article
- Ultrasonic Particle Manipulation in Glass Capillaries: A Concise Review.Micromachines · 2021Review
- Hypersound-Assisted Size Sorting of Microparticles on Inkjet-Patterned Protein Films.Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids · 2021Article
- Effects of Thermal Annealing on Femtosecond Laser Micromachined Glass Surfaces.Micromachines · 2021Article
- Thermophoretic Micron-Scale Devices: Practical Approach and Review.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Parametric study on the geometrical parameters of a lab-on-a-chip platform with tilted planar electrodes for continuous dielectrophoretic manipulation of microparticles.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Integrated Optofluidic Chip for Oscillatory Microrheology.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Enhancement in acoustic focusing of micro and nanoparticles by thinning a microfluidic device.Royal Society open science · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the pioneering work of Ashkin and coworkers, back in 1970, optical manipulation gained an increasing interest among the scientific community. Indeed, the advantages and the possibilities of this technique are unsubtle, allowing for the manipulation of small particles with a broad spectrum of dimensions (nanometers to micrometers size), with no physical contact and without affecting the sample viability. Thus, optical manipulation rapidly found a large set of applications in different fields, such as cell biology, biophysics, and genetics. Moreover, large benefits followed the combination of optical manipulation and microfluidic channels, adding to optical manipulation the advantages of microfluidics, such as a continuous sample replacement and therefore high throughput and automatic sample processing. In this work, we will discuss the state of the art of these optofluidic devices, where optical manipulation is used in combination with microfluidic devices. We will distinguish on the optical method implemented and three main categories will be presented and explored: (i) a single highly focused beam used to manipulate the sample, (ii) one or more diverging beams imping on the sample, or (iii) evanescent wave based manipulation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.