ArticleFrontiers in medical technology2025
Analysis of small extracellular vesicles from dried blood spots.
Article in Frontiers in medical technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This protocol paper describes how to extract small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) from dried blood spots (DBS). The methodology is described in detail and offers further evidence that the extracted particles are sEVs using western blotting (anti-CD9, CD63 and CD81) and fluorescence nanoparticle tracking analysis (fNTA). In addition, we present evidence that approximately 40% of the sEVs were recovered from DBS compared with EVs analyzed from plasma directly. The protocol proves to be robust, reliable and displays very interesting performances even after several weeks (up to 3 weeks) of storage of the DBS when analyzing the sEVs using protein microarray for the presence of the markers CD9, CD63, CD81, EpCAM, Flotilin-1, CD62E/P, CD142 and CD235a. These findings have important implications for using sEVs as future potential diagnostic tools by supporting the validity of less-invasive methods that can be implemented within vulnerable populations or in the field.
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.