ArticleBiomicrofluidics2021
Facilitating implementation of organs-on-chips by open platform technology.
Article in Biomicrofluidics, 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.
- STARTER: a stand-alone reconfigurable and translational organ-on-chip platform based on modularity and open design principles.Lab on a chip · 2026Article
- In vitro approaches to mimic cardiac mechanical load dynamics for enhancing maturation and disease modelling.Cardiovascular research · 2025Review
- Tissue chips as headway model and incitement technology.Synthetic and systems biotechnology · 2025Review
- Diamond quantum sensors in microfluidics technology.Biomicrofluidics · 2023Article
- An organ-on-chip device with integrated charge sensors and recording microelectrodes.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Systematic comparison of transcriptomes of Caco-2 cells cultured under different cellular and physiological conditions.Archives of toxicology · 2023Article
- Multiplexed fluidic circuit board for controlled perfusion of 3D blood vessels-on-a-chip.Lab on a chip · 2022Article
- Fluidic circuit board with modular sensor and valves enables stand-alone, tubeless microfluidic flow control in organs-on-chips.Lab on a chip · 2022Article
- Evaluating immune responseExploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Organ-on-chip (OoC) and multi-organs-on-chip (MOoC) systems have the potential to play an important role in drug discovery, disease modeling, and personalized medicine. However, most devices developed in academic labs remain at a proof-of-concept level and do not yet offer the ease-of-use, manufacturability, and throughput that are needed for widespread application. Commercially available OoC are easier to use but often lack the level of complexity of the latest devices in academia. Furthermore, researchers who want to combine different chips into MOoC systems are limited to one supplier, since commercial systems are not compatible with each other. Given these limitations, the implementation of standards in the design and operation of OoCs would strongly facilitate their acceptance by users. Importantly, the implementation of such standards must be carried out by many participants from both industry and academia to ensure a widespread acceptance and adoption. This means that standards must also leave room for proprietary technology development next to promoting interchangeability. An open platform with standardized interfacing and user-friendly operation can fulfill these requirements. In this Perspective article, the concept of an open platform for OoCs is defined from a technical perspective. Moreover, we discuss the importance of involving different stakeholders in the development, manufacturing, and application of such an open platform.
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.