ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2024
Use of a sample injection loop for an accurate measurement of particle number concentration by flow cytometry.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative Analysis of Sample Loop and Counting Bead-Based Methods for Size-Dependent Bias in Flow Cytometry.Analytical chemistry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Flow cytometry plays a pivotal role in biotechnology by providing quantitative measurements for a wide range of applications. Nonetheless, achieving precise particle quantification, particularly without relying on counting beads, remains a challenge. In this study, we introduce a novel exhaustive counting method featuring a sample loop-based injection system that delivers a defined sample volume to a detection system to enhance quantification in flow cytometry. We systematically assess the performance characteristics of this system with micron-sized polystyrene beads, addressing issues related to sample introduction, adsorption, and volume measurement. Results underscore the excellent analytical performance of the proposed method, characterized by high linearity and repeatability. We compare our approach to counting bead-based measurements, and while an approximate bias value was observed, the measured values were found to be similar between the methods, demonstrating its comparability and reliability. This method holds great promise for improving the accuracy and precision of particle quantification in flow cytometry, with implications for various fields including healthcare and environmental monitoring.
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.