ReviewAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2026
Towards engineering molecularly imprinted polymer-based sensors: linking design strategies to analytical and operational performance.
Review in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) as synthetic receptors in sensing has expanded rapidly across diagnostic, environmental, food, and pharmaceutical applications, owing to their ability to mimic biological recognition while offering chemical robustness and cost-effective synthesis. However, the analytical performance of MIP-based sensors is not determined by molecular recognition alone, but by how effectively the imprinted material is engineered and integrated within the sensing interface. Against this background, this review provides a performance-oriented analysis of strategies developed to improve MIP-based sensors by correlating specific material and device-design approaches with measurable sensing outcomes. After outlining the analytical and operational criteria used to evaluate sensor performance, the review examines how different engineering strategies address distinct performance-limiting factors, including restricted analyte accessibility, slow mass transport, binding-site heterogeneity, weak signal generation, and limited regeneration. Nanoscale and ultrathin MIP formats are discussed as approaches to improve binding-site accessibility and response dynamics, while oriented imprinting, template engineering, and solid-phase synthesis are examined as routes to enhance binding-site homogeneity and recognition reproducibility. Stimuli-responsive materials are considered for their ability to introduce active functionality into the recognition layer, enabling signal amplification, reversible target binding, and interface regeneration. By linking design strategies to sensor-level performance benefits and remaining operational limitations, this review provides a framework for evaluating how MIP engineering can contribute to more sensitive, reproducible, and functionally robust sensing platforms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42726234What 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.