Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40136962›Full record

ReviewBiosensors2025

Aspects of Electrochemical Biosensors Using Affinity Assays.

Thor Pedersen, Leonid Gurevich, Nils E Magnusson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biosensors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

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

3 authors.

Thor PedersenDepartment of Materials and Production, Aalborg University, Fibigerstræde 16, 9220 Aalborg, Denmark.ORCID 0009-0002-6517-731X
Leonid GurevichDepartment of Materials and Production, Aalborg University, Fibigerstræde 16, 9220 Aalborg, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-5777-2541
Nils E MagnussonBiostrip APS, Lindevangsvej 10, 8240 Risskov, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-9614-0133

Funding

Innovation Fund Denmark 1044-00193B
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent decades, the utilization of biomarkers has gained increasing attention. The timely identification and quantification of proteins, nucleic acids, and small molecules associated with a medical condition, infection, or contaminant have become increasingly crucial across a variety of fields, including medicine, food safety, and quality/environmental control. State-of-the-art biomarker detection methods predominantly rely on standard immunoassay techniques, requiring specialized laboratory equipment and trained personnel. This impedes the broad commercial implementation of biosensors in, e.g., Point-of-Care (PoC) settings where ease of operation, portability, and cost-efficiency are prioritized. Small, robust electrochemical biosensors are a promising alternative for analyzing biomarkers in complex samples within PoC environments. Therefore, creating and designing optimized sensing surfaces, immobilization strategies, and efficient signal generation are crucial for improving biosensor systems, which in turn can have real-world impact. In the present paper, we reviewed common electrode types and geometries used in electrochemical biosensors and the immobilization approaches, discussed the advantages and drawbacks of different electrochemical detection methods, and presented different labeling strategies for signal generation and enhancement.

Indexed as

Biosensing TechniquesElectrochemical TechniquesBiomarkersElectrodesHumansImmunoassayPoint-of-Care SystemsBiomarkersbiosensorelectrochemical biosensorelectrochemical labelselectrochemistryimmobilizationimmunoassaynanomaterialsscreen-printed electrodessurface modification

Identifiers

PMID40136962
PMCPMC11939962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.