ArticleBiosensors2020
A Comparative Study of Approaches to Improve the Sensitivity of Lateral Flow Immunoassay of the Antibiotic Lincomycin.
Article in Biosensors, 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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- An intelligent signal processing strategy for accurate quantification of composite signals in background fluorescence-quenching lateral flow immunoassay for folic acid.Mikrochimica acta · 2026Article
- Rapid, quantitative lateral flow immunoassay using polystyrene-gold composite nanoparticles and CIELAB analysis for on-site detection of Listeria monocytogenes in food samples.Mikrochimica acta · 2025Article
- The development and application of SERS-based lateral flow immunochromatography in the field of food safety.Mikrochimica acta · 2025Review
- Recent Advancements in Technologies to Detect EnterohaemorrhagicJournal of microbiology and biotechnology · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
This study provides a comparative assessment of the various nanodispersed markers and related detection techniques used in the immunochromatographic detection of an antibiotic lincomycin (LIN). Improving the sensitivity of the competitive lateral flow immunoassay is important, given the increasing demands for the monitoring of chemical contaminants in food. Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) and CdSe/ZnS quantum dots (QDs) were used for the development and comparison of three approaches for the lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) of LIN, namely, colorimetric, fluorescence, and surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS)-based LFIAs. It was demonstrated that, for colorimetric and fluorescence analysis, the detection limits were comparable at 0.4 and 0.2 ng/mL, respectively. A SERS-based method allowed achieving the gain of five orders of magnitude in the assay sensitivity (1.4 fg/mL) compared to conventional LFIAs. Therefore, an integration of a SERS reporter into the LFIA is a promising tool for extremely sensitive quantitative detection of target analytes. However, implementation of this time-consuming technique requires expensive equipment and skilled personnel. In contrast, conventional AuNP- and QD-based LFIAs can provide simple, rapid, and inexpensive point-of-care testing for practical use.
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.