ReviewBioanalysis2025
Patient centric blood sampling and analysis for diagnostics and laboratory medicine.
Review in Bioanalysis, 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.
- Quantification of Urinary NGAL Using Volumetric Dried Urine Sampling.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Respiratory Biomarkers: An Opportunity for Patient-Centric Microsampling Approach for Treatment Optimization.Clinical and translational science · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Blood sampling and diagnostic laboratory analysis are important aspects of our healthcare systems and patient management. However, the process by which the majority of blood specimens are currently collected, venipuncture, does not put the needs of the patient at the center of the process. This article explores the potential utilization of patient centric sampling (PCS) for the collection of smaller blood volumes using technologies that can enable this sampling to take place at a time and location that is more comfortable and convenient for the patient, including self-sampling at home. We discuss the benefits of these technologies, where they are currently used (including case studies), what to consider when contemplating their use and the current regulatory environment. We then explore why the routine adoption of these technologies has been relatively slow and how this impasse may be overcome for the benefit of all patients. This article describes a viable alternative approach for the collection of diagnostic specimens that puts the requirements of the patient at the center. It provides an invaluable resource for those interested in learning about and potentially implementing this approach into their workflows and addresses the concerns that individuals and organizations may have when doing so.
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.