Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38854523›Full record

ReviewACS omega2024

Emerging Biomimetic Sensor Technologies for the Detection of Pathogenic Bacteria: A Commercial Viability Study.

Margaux Frigoli, Joseph W Lowdon, Manlio Caldara, Thomas J Cleij, Hanne Diliën, Kasper Eersels, Bart van Grinsven

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ACS omega, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

7 authors.

Margaux FrigoliSensor Engineering Department, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8543-741X
Joseph W LowdonSensor Engineering Department, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Manlio CaldaraSensor Engineering Department, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0325-4113
Thomas J CleijSensor Engineering Department, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0172-9330
Hanne DiliënSensor Engineering Department, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Kasper EerselsSensor Engineering Department, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0214-1320
Bart van GrinsvenSensor Engineering Department, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6939-0866

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ensuring a rapid and accurate identification of harmful bacteria is crucial in various fields including environmental monitoring, food safety, and clinical diagnostics. Conventional detection methods often suffer from limitations such as long analysis time, complexity, and the need for qualified personnel. Therefore, a lot of research effort is devoted to developing technologies with the potential to revolutionize the detection of pathogenic bacteria by offering rapid, sensitive, and user-friendly platforms for point-of-care analysis. In this light, biosensors have gained significant commercial attention in recent years due to their simplicity, portability, and rapid analysis capabilities. The purpose of this review is to identify a trend by analyzing which biosensor technologies have become commercially successful in the field of bacteria detection. Moreover, we highlight the characteristics that a biosensor must possess to finally arrive in the market and therefore in the hands of the end-user, and we present critical examples of the market applications of various technologies. The aim is to investigate the reason why certain technologies have achieved commercial success and extrapolate these trends to the future economic viability of a new subfield in the world of biosensing: the development of biomimetic sensor platforms. Therefore, an overview of recent advances in the field of biomimetic bacteria detection will be presented, after which the challenges that need to be addressed in the coming years to improve market penetration will be critically evaluated. We will zoom into the current shortcomings of biomimetic sensors based on imprinting technology and aptamers and try to come up with a recommendation for further development based on the trends observed from previous commercial success stories in biosensing.

Identifiers

PMID38854523
PMCPMC11154936

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.