ReviewBiomicrofluidics2021
Microfluidic sample preparation for respiratory virus detection: A review.
Review in Biomicrofluidics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- On-site airborne pathogen detection for infection risk mitigation.Chemical Society reviews · 2023Review
- Recent development of microfluidics-based platforms for respiratory virus detection.Biomicrofluidics · 2023Article
- Microfluidic detection of viruses for human health.Biomicrofluidics · 2022Article
- Direct capture and smartphone quantification of airborne SARS-CoV-2 on a paper microfluidic chip.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2022Article
- Microfluidics-enabled functional 3D printing.Biomicrofluidics · 2022Review
- Advances in the Rapid Diagnostic of Viral Respiratory Tract Infections.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Techniques used to prepare clinical samples have been perfected for use in diagnostic testing in a variety of clinical situations, e.g., to extract, concentrate, and purify respiratory virus particles. These techniques offer a high level of purity and concentration of target samples but require significant equipment and highly trained personnel to conduct, which is difficult to achieve in resource-limited environments where rapid testing and diagnostics are crucial for proper handling of respiratory viruses. Microfluidics has popularly been utilized toward rapid virus detection in resource-limited environments, where most devices focused on detection rather than sample preparation. Initial microfluidic prototypes have been hindered by their reliance on several off-chip preprocessing steps and external laboratory equipment. Recently, sample preparation methods have also been incorporated into microfluidics to conduct the virus detection in an all-in-one, automated manner. Extraction, concentration, and purification of viruses have been demonstrated in smaller volumes of samples and reagents, with no need for specialized training or complex machinery. Recent devices show the ability to function independently and efficiently to provide rapid, automated sample preparation as well as the detection of viral samples with high efficiency. In this review, methods of microfluidic sample preparation for the isolation and purification of viral samples are discussed, limitations of current systems are summarized, and potential advances are identified.
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.