Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32049492›Full record

ReviewACS nano2020

Comparing Current Noise in Biological and Solid-State Nanopores.

Alessio Fragasso, Sonja Schmid, Cees Dekker

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in ACS nano, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed
–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

74 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Nanopore event detection in a simple and adaptive way.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Fabrication and Characterization of Glass Nanopores.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  20. Threading of Single Protein Molecules Through a Solid-State Nanopore.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article

14 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.

Alessio FragassoDepartment of Bionanoscience, Kavli Institute of Nanoscience , Delft University of Technology , Van der Maasweg 9 , 2629 HZ Delft , The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8366-2998
Sonja SchmidDepartment of Bionanoscience, Kavli Institute of Nanoscience , Delft University of Technology , Van der Maasweg 9 , 2629 HZ Delft , The Netherlands.
Cees DekkerDepartment of Bionanoscience, Kavli Institute of Nanoscience , Delft University of Technology , Van der Maasweg 9 , 2629 HZ Delft , The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6273-071X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanopores bear great potential as single-molecule tools for bioanalytical sensing and sequencing, due to their exceptional sensing capabilities, high-throughput, and low cost. The detection principle relies on detecting small differences in the ionic current as biomolecules traverse the nanopore. A major bottleneck for the further progress of this technology is the noise that is present in the ionic current recordings, because it limits the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and thereby the effective time resolution of the experiment. Here, we review the main types of noise at low and high frequencies and discuss the underlying physics. Moreover, we compare biological and solid-state nanopores in terms of the SNR, the important figure of merit, by measuring translocations of a short ssDNA through a selected set of nanopores under typical experimental conditions. We find that SiN

Indexed as

NanoporesDNAHumansParticle SizeSignal-To-Noise RatioSurface PropertiesDNAbiological nanoporesbiosensorsDNA sequencingion current noisesignal-to-noise ratiosingle-molecule detectionsolid-state nanoporestranslocation

Identifiers

PMID32049492
PMCPMC7045697

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.