ReviewPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Application of Microfluidics for Bacterial Identification.
Review in Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Applications of Lab on a Chip in Antimicrobial Susceptibility ofMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Pooled it
- Microfluidics in Intelligent Fresh Produce Preservation and Detection: From Precision Sensing to Active Delivery Systems.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026Review
- Capillary microfluidics aided single-cell manipulation for optical detection of bacterial pathogens.Biophysical reviews · 2026Review
- High-throughput single-cell isolation ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Recent Advancements in Metal-Organic Framework-Based Microfluidic Chips for Biomedical Applications.Micromachines · 2025Review
- Raman-Activated, Interactive Sorting of Isotope-Labeled Bacteria.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Illuminating the Tiny World: A Navigation Guide for Proper Raman Studies on Microorganisms.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bacterial infections continue to pose serious public health challenges. Though anti-bacterial therapeutics are effective remedies for treating these infections, the emergence of antibiotic resistance has imposed new challenges to treatment. Often, there is a delay in prescribing antibiotics at initial symptom presentation as it can be challenging to clinically differentiate bacterial infections from other organisms (e.g., viruses) causing infection. Moreover, bacterial infections can arise from food, water, or other sources. These challenges have demonstrated the need for rapid identification of bacteria in liquids, food, clinical spaces, and other environments. Conventional methods of bacterial identification rely on culture-based approaches which require long processing times and higher pathogen concentration thresholds. In the past few years, microfluidic devices paired with various bacterial identification methods have garnered attention for addressing the limitations of conventional methods and demonstrating feasibility for rapid bacterial identification with lower biomass thresholds. However, such culture-free methods often require integration of multiple steps from sample preparation to measurement. Research interest in using microfluidic methods for bacterial identification is growing; therefore, this review article is a summary of current advancements in this field with a focus on comparing the efficacy of polymerase chain reaction (PCR), loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), and emerging spectroscopic methods.
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.