ReviewBiosensors2023
Application of Paper-Based Microfluidic Analytical Devices (µPAD) in Forensic and Clinical Toxicology: 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 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interpol review of forensic drug chemistry, 2022-2025.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Review
- PCDA-EDA Colorimetric Nanofiber Sensor for Rapid Visual GHB Screening: Linker Reassignment and Scalable Fabrication.Biosensors · 2026Article
- Microfluidic Paper-Based Devices at the Edge of Real Samples: Fabrication Limits, Hybrid Detection, and Perspectives.Micromachines · 2026Article
- Paper-Based Microfluidic Devices: A Powerful Strategy for Rapid Detection.Micromachines · 2025Review
- Colorimetric methods using gold nanoparticles for forensic investigations.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2025Review
- Challenges in the development of microfluidic paper-based analytical devices (μPADs).Mikrochimica acta · 2025Review
- A Review on Optical Biosensors for Monitoring of Uric Acid and Blood Glucose Using Portable POCT Devices: Status, Challenges, and Future Horizons.Biosensors · 2025Review
- Microfluidic Paper-Based Devices.Micromachines · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The need for providing rapid and, possibly, on-the-spot analytical results in the case of intoxication has prompted researchers to develop rapid, sensitive, and cost-effective methods and analytical devices suitable for use in nonspecialized laboratories and at the point of need (PON). In recent years, the technology of paper-based microfluidic analytical devices (μPADs) has undergone rapid development and now provides a feasible, low-cost alternative to traditional rapid tests for detecting harmful compounds. In fact, µPADs have been developed to detect toxic molecules (arsenic, cyanide, ethanol, and nitrite), drugs, and drugs of abuse (benzodiazepines, cathinones, cocaine, fentanyl, ketamine, MDMA, morphine, synthetic cannabinoids, tetrahydrocannabinol, and xylazine), and also psychoactive substances used for drug-facilitated crimes (flunitrazepam, gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB), ketamine, metamizole, midazolam, and scopolamine). The present report critically evaluates the recent developments in paper-based devices, particularly in detection methods, and how these new analytical tools have been tested in forensic and clinical toxicology, also including future perspectives on their application, such as multisensing paper-based devices, microfluidic paper-based separation, and wearable paper-based sensors.
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.