ReviewBiomicrofluidics2020
Microfluidic methods for precision diagnostics in food allergy.
Review in Biomicrofluidics, 2020. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bioassays in Allergy: Technical Characteristics, Limitations, and Pathways to Clinical Implementation-An EAACI Position Paper.Clinical and translational allergy · 2026Review
- Code-multiplexed multi-frequency impedance cytometry with a unified deep-unfolding network.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2026Article
- A hand-operated microfluidic sample preparation-to-analysis workflow for simplifying the basophil activation test.Lab on a chip · 2025Article
- Scientific developments in understanding food allergy prevention, diagnosis, and treatment.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Combining avidin with CD63 improves basophil activation test accuracy in classifying peanut allergy.Allergy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Food allergy has reached epidemic proportions and has become a significant source of healthcare burden. Oral food challenge, the gold standard for food allergy assessment, often is not performed because it places the patient at risk of developing anaphylaxis. However, conventional alternative food allergy tests lack a sufficient predictive value. Therefore, there is a critical need for better diagnostic tests that are both accurate and safe. Microfluidic methods have the potential of helping one to address such needs and to personalize the diagnostics. This article first reviews conventional diagnostic approaches used in food allergy. Second, it reviews recent efforts to develop novel biomarkers and
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.