Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37630070›Full record

ReviewMicromachines2023

Rational PCR Reactor Design in Microfluidics.

Masoud Madadelahi, Marc J Madou

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Micromachines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Masoud MadadelahiSchool of Engineering and Sciences, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Monterrey 64849, NL, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-5301-3994
Marc J MadouSchool of Engineering and Sciences, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Monterrey 64849, NL, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0003-4847-3117
Autonomous Healthcare · USTecnológico de Monterrey · MX

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Limit of detection (LOD), speed, and cost for some of the most important diagnostic tools, i.e., lateral flow assays (LFA), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA), and polymerase chain reaction (PCR), all benefited from both the financial and regulatory support brought about by the pandemic. From those three, PCR has gained the most in overall performance. However, implementing PCR in point of care (POC) settings remains challenging because of its stringent requirements for a low LOD, multiplexing, accuracy, selectivity, robustness, and cost. Moreover, from a clinical point of view, it has become very desirable to attain an overall sample-to-answer time (t) of 10 min or less. Based on those POC requirements, we introduce three parameters to guide the design towards the next generation of PCR reactors: the overall sample-to-answer time (t); lambda (λ), a measure that sets the minimum number of copies required per reactor volume; and gamma (γ), the system's thermal efficiency. These three parameters control the necessary sample volume, the number of reactors that are feasible (for multiplexing), the type of fluidics, the PCR reactor shape, the thermal conductivity, the diffusivity of the materials used, and the type of heating and cooling systems employed. Then, as an illustration, we carry out a numerical simulation of temperature changes in a PCR device, discuss the leading commercial and RT-qPCR contenders under development, and suggest approaches to achieve the PCR reactor for RT-qPCR of the future.

Indexed as

extreme PCRfast PCRheat transfermicrofluidicsPCR reactor designpolymerase chain reactionthermal cycling

Identifiers

PMID37630070
PMCPMC10456396
OpenAlexW4385399666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.