Nanomaterials based electrochemical sensors for biomedical applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A growing variety of sensors have increasingly significant impacts on everyday life. Key issues to take into consideration toward the integration of biosensing platforms include the demand for minimal costs and the potential for real time monitoring, particularly for point-of-care applications where simplicity must also be considered. In light of these developmental factors, electrochemical approaches are the most promising candidate technologies due to their simplicity, high sensitivity and specificity. The primary focus of this review is to highlight the utility of nanomaterials, which are currently being studied for in vivo and in vitro medical applications as robust and tunable diagnostic and therapeutic platforms. Highly sensitive and precise nanomaterials based biosensors have opened up the possibility of creating novel technologies for the early-stage detection and diagnosis of disease related biomarkers. The attractive properties of nanomaterials have paved the way for the fabrication of a wide range of electrochemical sensors that exhibit improved analytical capacities. This review aims to provide insights into nanomaterials based electrochemical sensors and to illustrate their benefits in various key biomedical applications. This emerging discipline, at the interface of chemistry and the life sciences, offers a broad palette of opportunities for researchers with interests that encompass nanomaterials synthesis, supramolecular chemistry, controllable drug delivery and targeted theranostics in biology and medicine.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".