Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32287540›Full record

ReviewTrends in analytical chemistry : TRAC2016

Critical overview on the application of sensors and biosensors for clinical analysis.

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

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in analytical chemistry : TRAC, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 169 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Electrochemical biosensor detection on respiratory and flaviviruses.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2023
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Elastic Fibers/Fabrics for Wearables and Bioelectronics.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2022
    Review
  20. Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Celine I L JustinoDepartment of Chemistry & CESAM, University of Aveiro, Campus de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal.
Armando C DuarteDepartment of Chemistry & CESAM, University of Aveiro, Campus de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal.
Teresa A P Rocha-SantosDepartment of Chemistry & CESAM, University of Aveiro, Campus de Santiago, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal.
University of Aveiro · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sensors and biosensors have been increasingly used for clinical analysis due to their miniaturization and portability, allowing the construction of diagnostic devices for point-of-care testing. This paper presents an up-to-date overview and comparison of the analytical performance of sensors and biosensors recently used in clinical analysis. This includes cancer and cardiac biomarkers, hormones, biomolecules, neurotransmitters, bacteria, virus and cancer cells, along with related significant advances since 2011. Some methods of enhancing the analytical performance of sensors and biosensors through their figures of merit are also discussed.

Indexed as

Analytical performanceBiosensorClinical analysisFigure of meritSensor

Identifiers

PMID32287540
PMCPMC7112812
OpenAlexW2312862153

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.