ReviewTalanta2021
How should diagnostic kits development adapt quickly in COVID 19-like pandemic models? Pros and cons of sensory platforms used in COVID-19 sensing.
Review in Talanta, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- ColorX: A Fitness Tracker-Based Device for Rapid, Optical Sensing of Water Quality Parameters.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Convalescent serum-derived exosomes: Attractive niche as COVID-19 diagnostic tool and vehicle for mRNA delivery.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Article
- 3D-Printed SARS-CoV-2 RNA Genosensing Microfluidic System.Advanced materials technologies · 2022Article
- Evaluation of eleven immunochromatographic assays for SARS-CoV-2 detection: investigating the dengue cross-reaction.Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo · 2022Article
- Novel approaches for rapid detection of COVID-19 during the pandemic: A review.Analytical biochemistry · 2021Review
- Diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2 infections.Nature materials · 2021Review
- Detecting COVID-19 from Breath: A Game Changer for a Big Challenge.ACS sensors · 2021Article
- 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As COVID-19 has reached pandemic status and the number of cases continues to grow, widespread availability of diagnostic testing is critical in helping identify and control the emergence of this rapidly spreading and serious illness. However, a lacking in making a quick reaction to the threat and starting early development of diagnostic sensing tools has had an important impact globally. In this regard, here we will review critically the current developed diagnostic tools in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and compare the different types through the discussion of their pros and cons such as nucleic acid detection tests (including PCR and CRISPR), antibody and protein-based diagnosis tests. In addition, potential technologies that are under development such as on-site diagnosis platforms, lateral flow, and portable PCR units are discussed. Data collection and epidemiological analysis could also be an interesting factor to incorporate with the emerging technologies especially with the wide access to smartphones. Lastly, a SWOT analysis and perspectives on how the development of novel sensory platforms should be treated by the different decision-makers are analyzed.
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.