ReviewBiomicrofluidics2025
Point of care sepsis diagnosis: Exploring microfluidic techniques for sample preparation, biomarker isolation, and detection.
Review in Biomicrofluidics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Localized surface plasmon resonance-based point-of-care testing for pediatric sepsis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Telodendrimer nanotrap for selective cytokine removal from sepsis patient plasma.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
According to the third international consensus definition (sepsis-3), sepsis is defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction resulting from an uncontrolled host response to infection. Sepsis remains a leading cause of global mortality, largely due to the difficulty of achieving a timely diagnosis. The conventional diagnostic approaches for sepsis often face limitations in speed, portability, sensitivity, and specificity, which can lead to delayed or missed diagnoses. In response, microfluidic devices have emerged as powerful tools for point-of-care precise sample handling and preparation, enabling efficient isolation and detection of sepsis-causing bacteria and biomarkers. Fabrication techniques of these microfluidic devices, ranging from photolithography to xurography, have significantly advanced and paved the way for complex designs and improved functionality. Microfluidic platforms offer various benefits in sepsis diagnosis and prognosis. They facilitate rapid and automated sample processing, enhancing turnaround times and reducing the risk of contamination. Moreover, the integration of microfluidic systems with advanced detection methods enables the simultaneous analysis of multiple biomarkers, thereby enhancing diagnostic accuracy and prognostic capabilities. This review explores the evolution of sepsis diagnosis from traditional lab based methods to the use of microfluidic technology that can facilitate point of care diagnostics and discusses emerging trends in this field.
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.