ReviewEngineering in life sciences2024
Digitalization concepts in academic bioprocess development.
Review in Engineering in life sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intelligent Plasmonic Bio-Holoelectrochemical Systems: A Testable Architecture for Light-Programmed Microbial Electrochemistry.Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ) · 2026Review
- Managing complexity in research data management for heterogeneous biotechnological data: a perspective on interacting as data steward.Bioprocess and biosystems engineering · 2026Review
- Extraction strategies integrated with digitalization processes for the characterization of proteins from broad bean and red beetroot waste leaves.Ultrasonics sonochemistry · 2026Article
- Advancing IoT in the lab: Next generation Gateway-Module for laboratory device integration.HardwareX · 2025Article
- Digitalization concepts in academic bioprocess development.Engineering in life sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digitalization with integrated devices, digital and physical assistants, automation, and simulation is setting a new direction for laboratory work. Even with complex research workflows, high staff turnover, and a limited budget some laboratories have already shown that digitalization is indeed possible. However, academic bioprocess laboratories often struggle to follow the trend of digitalization. Due to their diverse research circumstances, high variety of team composition, goals, and limitations the concepts are substantially different. Here, we will provide an overview on different aspects of digitalization and describe how academic laboratories successfully digitalized their working environment. The key aspect is the collaboration and communication between IT-experts and scientific staff. The developed digital infrastructure is only useful if it supports the laboratory worker and does not complicate their work. Thereby, laboratory researchers have to collaborate closely with IT-experts in order for a well-developed and maintainable digitalization concept that fits their individual needs and level of complexity. This review may serve as a starting point or a collection of ideas for the transformation toward a digitalized laboratory.
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.