ArticlePloS one2026
Algorithm-assisted interpretation of cyclic and differential pulse voltammetry for cardiac troponin detection.
Article in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease remains a leading cause of mortality worldwide, and rapid identification of cardiac biomarkers is essential for early detection. Electrochemical voltammetry techniques, particularly cyclic voltammetry (CV) and differential pulse voltammetry (DPV), are widely used for detecting cardiac troponin; however, interpretation of raw voltammetric signals is often affected by baseline drift, signal noise, and operator-dependent analysis. This study proposes an algorithm-assisted analytical framework for automated interpretation of voltammetric data obtained from a screen-printed carbon electrode potentiostat. Polynomial fitting was applied for baseline correction in CV signals, while asymmetric least squares (ALS) was employed for DPV data. Peak-to-baseline current response was extracted as a quantitative indicator of biomarker presence. The proposed method successfully identified characteristic voltammetric peaks and distinguished samples with higher and lower cardiac biomarker responses relative to a predefined detection threshold. The analysis showed close agreement with reference electrochemical analysis software, demonstrating reliable peak detection and baseline estimation. By reducing manual interpretation and improving signal clarity, the framework enhances the reproducibility and accessibility of electrochemical biosensor measurements and supports early screening of cardiac biomarkers.
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.