ArticleiMetaOmics2025
A portable device for probiotic counting and viability assessment based on microfluidic chip and image recognition.
Article in iMetaOmics, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Probiotics play a critical role in maintaining or improving gut microbiome balance, offering numerous health benefits. Therefore, the accurate quantification of viable probiotics is essential for ensuring the efficacy of probiotic products. However, traditional culture-based methods are cumbersome and time-intensive, limiting their applications in scenarios requiring real-time decisions. Here, we report a portable, cost-effective system (approximately $2 per test, including reagents and one-time microfluidic chip usage) that enables rapid (3 min) on-site quantification of viable probiotics through a microfluidic chip integrated with a fluorescent biosensor and advanced image recognition technology. The system's reliability and accuracy were validated by comparison with the standard flow cytometry and plate counting, with results showing no significant differences in viable probiotics numbers. Furthermore, the platform demonstrated excellent specificity in distinguishing dead probiotics from viable ones with a large quantification range of 10
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.