ReviewBiosensors2021
Biosensors for Detection of Biochemical Markers Relevant to Osteoarthritis.
Review in Biosensors, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Usefulness of Serological Inflammatory Markers in Patients with Rotator Cuff Disease-A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Pooled it
- State-of-the-Art and Next Generation Intra-Articular Implantable Biosensors for Osteoarthritis: From Analytical Limits to Operational Stability.Biosensors · 2026Review
- Advanced Biosensing Strategies for Last-Line Antibiotics Vancomycin, Colistin, Daptomycin and Meropenem: Comparative Analysis of Electrochemical and Optical Detection Methods.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The effects of radiofrequency on cartilage: A systematic review of preclinical evidence in animals and humans.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Beyond the Surface: Nutritional Interventions Integrated with Diagnostic Imaging Tools to Target and Preserve Cartilage Integrity: A Narrative Review.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Revolutionizing total hip arthroplasty: The role of artificial intelligence and machine learning.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Therapeutic Controlled Release Strategies for Human Osteoarthritis.Advanced healthcare materials · 2025Review
- Role of the Gut Microbiota in Osteoarthritis, Rheumatoid Arthritis, and Spondylarthritis: An Update on the Gut-Joint Axis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Biomedical Big Data Technologies, Applications, and Challenges for Precision Medicine: A Review.Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ) · 2024Review
- Review
- Clinical Significance of Action Research-Based Seamless Care to Improve Imaging Efficiency and Patients' Cognition, and Alleviate Patient Anxiety.International journal of general medicine · 2023Article
- Implantable biosensors for musculoskeletal health.Connective tissue research · 2022Review
- Silencing of Angiopoietin-Like Protein 4 (Angptl4) Decreases Inflammation, Extracellular Matrix Degradation, and Apoptosis in Osteoarthritis via the Sirtuin 1/NF-Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2022Article
- Harnessing Tissue-derived Extracellular Vesicles for Osteoarthritis Theranostics.Theranostics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review aimed to assess the advantages of biosensors in detecting biomarkers for the early diagnosis of osteoarthritis (OA). OA is the most prevalent musculoskeletal disease and is a leading cause of disability and pain worldwide. The diagnosis of OA could be performed through clinical examinations and imaging only during the late stages of the disease. Biomarkers could be used for the diagnosis of the disease in the very early stages. Biosensors could detect biomarkers with high accuracy and low costs. This paper focuses on the biosensors mainly adopted to detect OA markers (electrochemical, optical, Quartz crystal microbalance, molecular and wearable biosensors). A comprehensive search on PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL and Embase databases was conducted from the inception to November 2020. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to improve the reporting of the review. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) was used for quality assessment. From a total amount of 1086 studies identified, only 19 articles were eligible for this study. The main advantages of the biosensors reported were accuracy, limited cost and ease of use, compared to traditional methods (ELISA). Otherwise, due to the lack of data and the low level of evidence of the papers included, it was impossible to find significant results. Therefore, further high-quality studies are required.
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.