Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34778604›Full record

ReviewACS omega2021

Paper-Based Biosensors for COVID-19: A Review of Innovative Tools for Controlling the Pandemic.

Tomás Pinheiro, A Rita Cardoso, Cristina E A Sousa, Ana C Marques, Ana P M Tavares, Ana Miguel Matos, Maria Teresa Cruz, Felismina T C Moreira, Rodrigo Martins, Elvira Fortunato and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ACS omega, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Nanofiber Based on Electrically Conductive Materials for Biosensor Applications.Biomedical materials & devices (New York, N.Y.) · 2022
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Nanomaterials-based sensors for the detection of COVID-19: A review.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2022
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tomás PinheiroCENIMAT i3N, Materials Science Department, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa and CEMOP/UNINOVA, Caparica 2829-516, Portugal.
A Rita CardosoCENIMAT i3N, Materials Science Department, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa and CEMOP/UNINOVA, Caparica 2829-516, Portugal.
Cristina E A SousaBioMark@UC, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, University of Coimbra R. Sílvio Lima, Pólo II, 3030-790 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4195-712X
Ana C MarquesCENIMAT i3N, Materials Science Department, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa and CEMOP/UNINOVA, Caparica 2829-516, Portugal.
Ana P M TavaresBioMark@UC, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, University of Coimbra R. Sílvio Lima, Pólo II, 3030-790 Coimbra, Portugal.
Ana Miguel MatosFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Pólo das Ciências da Saúde, Azinhaga de Santa Comba, 3000-548 Coimbra, Portugal.
Maria Teresa CruzFaculty of Medicine, Center for Neuroscience and Cell Biology, University of Coimbra, Rua Larga, Polo I, 1st Floor, Coimbra 3004-504, Portugal.
Felismina T C MoreiraBioMark@UC, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, University of Coimbra R. Sílvio Lima, Pólo II, 3030-790 Coimbra, Portugal.
Rodrigo MartinsCENIMAT i3N, Materials Science Department, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa and CEMOP/UNINOVA, Caparica 2829-516, Portugal.
Elvira FortunatoCENIMAT i3N, Materials Science Department, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa and CEMOP/UNINOVA, Caparica 2829-516, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4202-7047
M Goreti F SalesBioMark@UC, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, University of Coimbra R. Sílvio Lima, Pólo II, 3030-790 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9936-7336
University of Coimbra · PTUniversidade Nova de Lisboa · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The appearance and quick spread of the new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus disease, COVID-19, brought major societal challenges. Importantly, suitable medical diagnosis procedures and smooth clinical management of the disease are an emergent need, which must be anchored on novel diagnostic methods and devices. Novel molecular diagnostic tools relying on nucleic acid amplification testing have emerged globally and are the current gold standard in COVID-19 diagnosis. However, the need for widespread testing methodologies for fast, effective testing in multiple epidemiological scenarios remains a crucial step in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. Biosensors have previously shown the potential for cost-effective and accessible diagnostics, finding applications in settings where conventional, laboratorial techniques may not be readily employed. Paper- and cellulose-based biosensors can be particularly relevant in pandemic times, for the renewability, possibility of mass production with sustainable methodologies, and safe environmental disposal. In this review, paper-based devices and platforms targeting SARS-CoV-2 are showcased and discussed, as a means to achieve quick and low-cost PoC diagnosis, including detection methodologies for viral genomic material, viral antigen detection, and serological antibody testing. Devices targeting inflammatory markers relevant for COVID-19 are also discussed, as fast, reliable bedside diagnostic tools for patient treatment and follow-up.

Identifiers

PMID34778604
PMCPMC8577188
OpenAlexW3208228511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.