MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130528722 · doi:10.1039/b704256f

Ultrasensitive assays for proteins

2007· review· en· W2130528722 on OpenAlexafffund
Hongquan Zhang, Qiang Zhao, Xing‐Fang Li, X. Chris Le

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Analyst · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsNanotechnologyComputational biologyDNAProtein detectionChemistryBiologyMaterials scienceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proteins are essential components of organisms and are involved in a wide range of biological functions. There are increasing demands for ultra-sensitive protein detection, because many important protein biomarkers are present at ultra-low levels, especially during the early stages of disease. Measuring proteins at low levels is also crucial for investigations of the protein synthesis and functions in biological systems. In this review, we summarize the recent developments of novel technology enabling ultrasensitive protein detection. We focus on two groups of techniques that involve either polymerase amplification of affinity DNA probes or signal amplification by the use of nano-/micro-materials. The polymerase-based amplification of affinity DNA probes indirectly improves the sensitivity of protein detection by increasing the number of detection molecules. The use of nano-/micro-materials conjugated to affinity probes enhances the measurement signals by using the unique electrical, optical, and catalytic properties of these novel materials. This review describes the basic principles, performances, applications, merits, and limitations of these techniques.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.008

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.333 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations126
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AnalystSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207