ArticleBiosensors & bioelectronics2022
Smartphone-based sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 from saline gargle samples via flow profile analysis on a paper microfluidic chip.
Article in Biosensors & bioelectronics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI-Enabled Microfluidics for Respiratory Pathogen Detection.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Influenza viruses and SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis via sensitive testing methods in clinical application.Heliyon · 2024Review
- Single-step batch fabrication of microfluidic paper-based analytical devices with a 3D printer and their applications in nanoenzyme-enhanced visual detection of dopamine.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Smartphone-based point-of-care testing of the SARS-CoV-2: A systematic review.Scientific African · 2023Article
- Paper microfluidics with deep learning for portable intelligent nucleic acid amplification tests.Talanta · 2023Article
- A portable immunosensor provides sensitive and rapid detection of Borrelia burgdorferi antigen in spiked blood.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Microfluidic-based technologies for diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of COVID-19: recent advances and future directions.Biomedical microdevices · 2023Review
- Recent development of microfluidics-based platforms for respiratory virus detection.Biomicrofluidics · 2023Article
- Review
- Porous Structural Microfluidic Device for Biomedical Diagnosis: A Review.Micromachines · 2023Review
- Achieving broad availability of SARS-CoV-2 detections via smartphone-based analysis.Trends in analytical chemistry : TRAC · 2023Review
- Biomedical Applications of Microfluidic Devices: A Review.Biosensors · 2022Review
- COVID-19 variants' cross-reactivity on the paper microfluidic particle counting immunoassay.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2022Article
- Visual Detection of COVID-19 from Materials Aspect.Advanced fiber materials · 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
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Respiratory viruses, especially coronaviruses, have resulted in worldwide pandemics in the past couple of decades. Saliva-based paper microfluidic assays represent an opportunity for noninvasive and rapid screening, yet both the sample matrix and test method come with unique challenges. In this work, we demonstrated the rapid and sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 from saliva samples, which could be simpler and more comfortable for patients than existing methods. Furthermore, we systematically investigated the components of saliva samples that affected assay performance. Using only a smartphone, an antibody-conjugated particle suspension, and a paper microfluidic chip, we made the assay user-friendly with minimal processing. Unlike the previously established flow rate assays that depended solely on the flow rate or distance, this unique assay analyzes the flow profile to determine infection status. Particle-target immunoagglutination changed the surface tension and subsequently the capillary flow velocity profile. A smartphone camera automatically measured the flow profile using a Python script, which was not affected by ambient light variations. The limit of detection (LOD) was 1 fg/μL SARS-CoV-2 from 1% saliva samples and 10 fg/μL from simulated saline gargle samples (15% saliva and 0.9% saline). This method was highly specific as demonstrated using influenza A/H1N1. The sample-to-answer assay time was <15 min, including <1-min capillary flow time. The overall accuracy was 89% with relatively clean clinical saline gargle samples. Despite some limitations with turbid clinical samples, this method presents a potential solution for rapid mass testing techniques during any infectious disease outbreak as soon as the antibodies become available.
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.