ArticleScientific reports2026
Effect of fabrication error on the sensitivity of a one-dimensional photonic crystal sensor for cancer detection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One-dimensional photonic crystal (1D-PC) biosensors are promising for applications like cancer detection due to their high sensitivity, but their performance is often compromised by unavoidable fabrication errors. However, theoretical analyses often do not quantitatively assess the impact of these fabrication errors on key sensor performance parameters, such as sensitivity and peak width. This study addresses this issue by performing a statistical analysis to investigate how random fabrication deviations influence these performance metrics, thereby providing a more realistic evaluation of sensor stability and robustness. For a designed 1D-PC biosensor, the transmission spectrum was first calculated using the transfer matrix method (TMM). A statistical simulation was then performed to analyze how random errors in layer thickness affect the sensor's performance at various error levels (δ) and at two incidence angles, 0° and 85°, with 100 iterations per level. The results showed that as fabrication errors increase, the values for the transmission peak position and Full Width at Half Maximum (FWHM) deviate from their ideal, error-free state. The sensitivity also fluctuates around the ideal value. Interestingly, it was found that some sensor instances could achieve sensitivities higher than the ideal, error-free value. The findings confirm that the 85° incidence angle, previously optimized
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.