ArticleScientific reports2019
Paper Stacks for Uniform Rehydration of Dried Reagents in Paper Microfluidic Devices.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in paper-based electrochemical immunosensors: review of fabrication strategies and biomedical applications.Royal Society open science · 2023Review
- Valveless On-Chip Aliquoting for Molecular Diagnosis.Micromachines · 2023Article
- Microfluidic Paper-based Device for Medicinal Diagnosis.Current topics in medicinal chemistry · 2022Article
- Microfluidics as a Novel Technique for Tuberculosis: From Diagnostics to Drug Discovery.Microorganisms · 2021Review
- Review
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
Spatially uniform reconstitution of dried reagents is critical to the function of paper microfluidic devices. Advancing fluid fronts in paper microfluidic devices drive (convect) and concentrate rehydrated reagents to the edges, causing steep chemical gradients and imperfect mixing. This largely unsolved problem in paper microfluidics is exacerbated by increasing device dimensions. In this article, we demonstrate that mixing of dried reagents with a rehydrating fluid in paper microfluidics may be significantly enhanced by stacking paper layers having different wicking rates. Compared to single-layer paper membranes, stacking reduced the "non-reactive area", i.e. area in which the reconstituted reagents did not interact with the rehydrating fluid, by as much as 97% in large (8 cm × 2 cm) paper membranes. A paper stack was designed to collect ~0.9 ml liquid sample and uniformly mix it with dried reagents. Applications of this technology are demonstrated in two areas: (i) collection and dry storage of sputum samples for tuberculosis testing, and (ii) salivary glucose detection using an enzymatic assay and colorimetric readout. Maximizing the interaction of liquids with dried reagents is central to enhancing the performance of all paper microfluidic devices; this technique is therefore likely to find important applications in paper microfluidics.
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.