ReviewAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2026
Analytical applications of molecularly imprinted polymers: a personal view.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) are biomimetic counterparts of biomacromolecules that are synthesized by templating the target within a polymeric network. While the affinity of MIPs can compete with that of antibodies, the specific activity of natural enzymes remains superior to that of catalytically active MIPs. Although the mechanisms underlying the generation of antibodies and MIPs are fundamentally different, important principles have been transferred from biology to artificial binders. Templating a fragment of the target instead of the entire molecule or particle simplifies MIP synthesis and reduces costs (epitope imprinting), while hierarchical imprinting improves template orientation and generates more homogeneous binding sites than conventional random imprinting. The generation of anti-idiotypic MIPs by double imprinting follows the concept of anti-idiotypic antibodies, while post-imprinting modifications mimic post-translational modifications. Beyond classical terminal epitopes, recent approaches increasingly utilize internal epitopes, affinity tags, labels, carbohydrates, and surface motifs of viruses and cells as alternative imprinting targets. Recent advances in analytical MIP systems increasingly rely on the integration of nanomaterials to improve signal generation, mass transport, and target accessibility. In this context, nanoparticles, carbon-based nanomaterials, MXenes, and metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) have enabled the development of more efficient and functionally integrated sensing platforms. In parallel, computational rational design, artificial intelligence, and machine learning-assisted signal deconvolution are emerging as powerful tools for optimizing monomer selection, interpreting complex sensor outputs, and enabling multiplex analysis using cross-reactive MIP sensor arrays. Despite clear advantages such as higher stability, lower cost, and applicability to toxic or weakly immunogenic substances, the commercial success of MIPs is still restricted by challenges related to selectivity, reproducibility, and translation into robust real-world analytical platforms. This review discusses the evolution of analytical MIPs from classical molecular recognition materials toward increasingly intelligent biomimetic sensing systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42766116What 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.