↓ Skip to main content

Naked-eye detection as a universal approach to lower the limit of detection of enzyme-linked immunoassays

Overview of attention for article published in Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Naked-eye detection as a universal approach to lower the limit of detection of enzyme-linked immunoassays
Published in
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00216-016-9453-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erin F. O’Connor, Sureyya Paterson, Roberto de la Rica

Abstract

Colorimetric biosensors for the detection of analytes with the naked eye are required in environmental monitoring, point-of-care diagnostics, and analyses in resources constrained settings, where detection instruments may not be available. However, instrument-based detection methods are usually more adequate for detecting small variations in the signal compared to naked-eye detection schemes, and consequently the limit of detection of the latter is usually higher than the former. Here, we demonstrate that the limit of detection of colorimetric enzyme-linked immunoassays can be decreased several orders of magnitude when using naked-eye detection instead of a spectrophotometer for detecting the signal. The key step to lower the limit of detection is adding a small volume of chromogenic substrate during the signal generation step. This generates highly colored solutions that can be easily visualized with the naked eye and recorded with the camera of a mobile phone. The proposed method does not require expensive equipment or complex protocols to enhance the signal, and therefore it is a universal approach to lower the limit of detection of colorimetric enzyme-linked immunoassays.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 26%
Student > Master 5 13%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Lecturer 3 8%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 9 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 16%
Psychology 3 8%
Computer Science 2 5%
Chemical Engineering 2 5%
Other 9 24%
Unknown 7 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 January 2017.
All research outputs
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#5,260
of 9,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,004
of 315,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#57
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,618 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,301 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.