MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314136438 · doi:10.1021/ac401847x

Automated Digital Microfluidic Platform for Magnetic-Particle-Based Immunoassays with Optimization by Design of Experiments

2013· article· en· W2314136438 on OpenAlexafffund
Kihwan Choi, Alphonsus H. C. Ng, Ryan Fobel, Lyle E. Yarnell, Elroy Pearson, Carl M. Oleksak, Andrew T. Fischer, Robert P. Luoma, John M. Robinson, Julie Audet, Aaron R. Wheeler

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrowetting and Microfluidic Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersAbbott DiagnosticsCanada Research ChairsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC MicrosystemsUniversity of TorontoU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsChemistryDigital microfluidicsMicrofluidicsMagnetic particle inspectionMagnetic nanoparticlesNanotechnologyParticle (ecology)ChromatographyNanoparticle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce an automated digital microfluidic (DMF) platform capable of performing immunoassays from sample to analysis with minimal manual intervention. This platform features (a) a 90 Pogo pin interface for digital microfluidic control, (b) an integrated (and motorized) photomultiplier tube for chemiluminescent detection, and (c) a magnetic lens assembly which focuses magnetic fields into a narrow region on the surface of the DMF device, facilitating up to eight simultaneous digital microfluidic magnetic separations. The new platform was used to implement a three-level full factorial design of experiments (DOE) optimization for thyroid-stimulating hormone immunoassays, varying (1) the analyte concentration, (2) the sample incubation time, and (3) the sample volume, resulting in an optimized protocol that reduced the detection limit and sample incubation time by up to 5-fold and 2-fold, respectively, relative to those from previous work. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a DOE optimization for immunoassays in a microfluidic system of any format. We propose that this new platform paves the way for a benchtop tool that is useful for implementing immunoassays in near-patient settings, including community hospitals, physicians' offices, and small clinical laboratories.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations142
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicElectrowetting and Microfluidic TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207