Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36979624›Full record

ReviewBiosensors2023

A Short Review on Miniaturized Biosensors for the Detection of Nucleic Acid Biomarkers.

Madhusudan B Kulkarni, Narasimha H Ayachit, Tejraj M Aminabhavi

Full text readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biosensors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Madhusudan B KulkarniSchool of Electronics and Communication Engineering, KLE Technological University, Vidyanagar, Hubballi 580023, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0002-2911-3784
Narasimha H AyachitSchool of Advanced Sciences, KLE Technological University, Hubballi 580031, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0002-5463-2586
Tejraj M AminabhaviSchool of Advanced Sciences, KLE Technological University, Hubballi 580031, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0002-5613-3916

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Even today, most biomarker testing is executed in centralized, dedicated laboratories using bulky instruments, automated analyzers, and increased analysis time and expenses. The development of miniaturized, faster, low-cost microdevices is immensely anticipated for substituting for these conventional laboratory-oriented assays and transferring diagnostic results directly onto the patient's smartphone using a cloud server. Pioneering biosensor-based approaches might make it possible to test biomarkers with reliability in a decentralized setting, but there are still a number of issues and restrictions that must be resolved before the development and use of several biosensors for the proper understanding of the measured biomarkers of numerous bioanalytes such as DNA, RNA, urine, and blood. One of the most promising processes to address some of the issues relating to the growing demand for susceptible, quick, and affordable analysis techniques in medical diagnostics is the creation of biosensors. This article critically discusses a short review of biosensors used for detecting nucleic acid biomarkers, and their use in biomedical prognostics will be addressed while considering several essential characteristics.

Indexed as

Biosensing TechniquesNucleic AcidsBiomarkersDNAHumansReproducibility of ResultsBiomarkersDNANucleic Acidsbiomarkerbiosensorsdeoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)microfluidicspoint-of-care-testing (POCT)

Identifiers

PMID36979624
PMCPMC10046286

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read6
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.