ArticleElectrophoresis2025
Comparing Different Light Models for Virtual Electrodes in Optoelectronic Tweezers.
Article in Electrophoresis, 2025. 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.
- Comparing Different Light Models for Virtual Electrodes in Optoelectronic Tweezers.Electrophoresis · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Optoelectronic tweezers (OET) allow for the physical manipulation of particles of interest via dielectrophoresis (DEP) in microfluidic devices. To produce the nonuniform electric field required to enable DEP, light is used to expose a photoconductive film and create a so-called virtual electrode (VE). Several attempts have been made to model the light profile used to excite the photoconductive layer and produce the VE. However, no comparison of the models has been presented in the literature. Here, we present a comparative study among the rectangular, Gaussian, and saturated-Gaussian models in mapping to light profiles obtained experimentally. These models were then used to predict the activation of a VE and the distribution of the electric field in an OET system. From this comparison, it is possible to conclude that the saturated-Gaussian model should be the preferred choice to study these systems. Moreover, VEs were also compared numerically to conventional gold electrodes used regularly in DEP applications, concluding that very relevant differences exist between the electric fields produced by these two types of electrodes.
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.