ArticleBiosensors2024
Comparative Analysis of QCM and Electrochemical Aptasensors for SARS-CoV-2 Detection.
Article in Biosensors, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanoyeast-based impedimetric biosensor with mutated single chain antigen-binding fragment anchoring for SARS-CoV-2 detection.Biomedical microdevices · 2026Article
- Zinc tin oxide/polyvinyl alcohol nanocomposites enable sensitive pH-dependent arsenic detection by quartz crystal microbalance.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy-Based Biosensors for Label-Free Detection of Pathogens.Biosensors · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rapid and accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2, particularly its spike receptor-binding domain (S-RBD), was crucial for managing the COVID-19 pandemic. This study presents the development and optimization of two types of aptasensors: quartz crystal microbalance (QCM) and electrochemical sensors, both employing thiol-modified DNA aptamers for S-RBD detection. The QCM aptasensor demonstrated exceptional sensitivity, achieved by optimizing aptamer concentration, buffer composition, and pre-treatment conditions, with a limit of detection (LOD) of 0.07 pg/mL and a linear range from 1 pg/mL to 0.1 µg/mL, and a significant frequency change was observed upon target binding. The electrochemical aptasensor, designed for rapid and efficient preparation, utilized a one-step modification process that reduced the preparation time to 2 h while maintaining high sensitivity and specificity. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) enabled the detection of S-RBD concentrations as low as 132 ng/mL. Both sensors exhibited high specificity, with negligible non-specific interactions observed in the presence of competing proteins. Additionally, the QCM aptasensor's functionality and stability were verified in biological fluids, indicating its potential for real-world applications. This study highlights the comparative advantages of QCM and electrochemical aptasensors in terms of preparation time, sensitivity, and specificity, offering valuable insights for the development of rapid, sensitive, and specific diagnostic tools for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses.
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.