Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35646223›Full record

ReviewBiomicrofluidics2022

The impact of microfluidics in high-throughput drug-screening applications.

Paola De Stefano, Elena Bianchi, Gabriele Dubini

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomicrofluidics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Machine-Learning-Aided Advanced Electrochemical Biosensors.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Cancer Organoids as reliable disease models to drive clinical development of novel therapies.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2024
    Article
  15. Periodic Flows in Microfluidics.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

3 authors.

Paola De StefanoLaboratory of Biological Structure Mechanics, Department of Chemistry, Materials and Chemical Engineering "G. Natta," Politecnico di Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3450-7638
Elena BianchiLaboratory of Biological Structure Mechanics, Department of Chemistry, Materials and Chemical Engineering "G. Natta," Politecnico di Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1003-4178
Gabriele DubiniLaboratory of Biological Structure Mechanics, Department of Chemistry, Materials and Chemical Engineering "G. Natta," Politecnico di Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0907-2903

Funding

Cancer Research UK 26815
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drug discovery is an expensive and lengthy process. Among the different phases, drug discovery and preclinical trials play an important role as only 5-10 of all drugs that begin preclinical tests proceed to clinical trials. Indeed, current high-throughput screening technologies are very expensive, as they are unable to dispense small liquid volumes in an accurate and quick way. Moreover, despite being simple and fast, drug screening assays are usually performed under static conditions, thus failing to recapitulate tissue-specific architecture and biomechanical cues present

Identifiers

PMID35646223
PMCPMC9142169

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.