ArticleNutrients2023
Construction and Evaluation of a Novel MAP Immunoassay for 9 Nutrition-and-Health-Related Protein Markers Based on Multiplex Liquid Protein Chip Technique.
Article in Nutrients, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We attempted to construct and evaluate a novel detection method to realize simultaneous detection based on a multiplex liquid protein chip technique for nine nutrition-and-health-related protein markers to meet the requirement of an accurate, simultaneous and comprehensive analysis of the proteomics of nutrition and health. The lower limits of detection, biological limits of detection and regression equations of serum ferritin (SF), soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR), c-reactive protein (CRP), retinol-binding protein4 (RBP4), apolipoprotein B (ApoB), alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), prealbumin (PA), carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA) and D-Dimmer (D-D) were determined after a series of optimal experiments. Then, the results of the methodological evaluation for this novel method indicated that the accuracies were between 70.12% and 127.07%, the within-run precisions were between 0.85% and 7.31%, the between-run precisions were between 3.53% and 19.07%, the correlation coefficients between this method and other methods were above 0.504 (
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.