ReviewBiosensors2023
Recent Advances in Molecular and Immunological Diagnostic Platform for Virus Detection: A Review.
Review in Biosensors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Catch-and-Display Immunoassay as an Accessible Platform for Digital Biomarker Detection.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Proteomics in the Diagnosis of Viral and Pathogenic Infections.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- A Single-Tube Two-Step MIRA-CRISPR/Cas12b Assay for the Rapid Detection of Mpox Virus.Viruses · 2025Article
- Comprehensive performance evaluation of a high-throughput automated system for pathogen nucleic acid detection in clinical settings.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- 3D Simulation-Driven Design of a Microfluidic Immunosensor for Real-Time Monitoring of Sweat Biomarkers.Micromachines · 2024Article
- Rapid detection of goose megrivirus using TaqMan real-time PCR technology.Poultry science · 2024Article
- Shifting the paradigm in RNA virus detection: integrating nucleic acid testing and immunoassays through single-molecule digital ELISA.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused an ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak and a rising demand for the development of accurate, timely, and cost-effective diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 as well as other viral infections in general. Currently, traditional virus screening methods such as plate culturing and real-time PCR are considered the gold standard with accurate and sensitive results. However, these methods still require sophisticated equipment, trained personnel, and a long analysis time. Alternatively, with the integration of microfluidic and biosensor technologies, microfluidic-based biosensors offer the ability to perform sample preparation and simultaneous detection of many analyses in one platform. High sensitivity, accuracy, portability, low cost, high throughput, and real-time detection can be achieved using a single platform. This review presents recent advances in microfluidic-based biosensors from many works to demonstrate the advantages of merging the two technologies for sensing viruses. Different platforms for virus detection are classified into two main sections: immunoassays and molecular assays. Moreover, available commercial sensing tests are analyzed.
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.