ReviewACS omega2025
Revolutionizing Biomedical Research: Unveiling the Power of Microphysiological Systems with Advanced Assays, Integrated Sensor Technologies, and Real-Time Monitoring.
Review in ACS omega, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microengineered bone models: advances and applications of bone-on-a-chip technology.Journal of biological engineering · 2026Review
- A review of the wide applications of microfluidic devices in peri-implantitis, periodontitis, and endodontics.Odontology · 2026Review
- Subventricular Zone-on-a-Chip: A Model to Study Neurogenesis Disruption in Neonatal Intraventricular Hemorrhage.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Functional material probes and advanced technologies in organ-on-a-chip characterization.Theranostics · 2026Review
- Mechanobiology in Action: Biomaterials, Devices, and the Cellular Machinery of Force Sensing.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- My cells, my model: immune-competent autologous organ-on-chip systems as a new paradigm in precision medicine.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The limitation of animal models to imitate a therapeutic response in humans is a key problem that challenges their use in fundamental research. Organ-on-a-chip (OOC) devices, also called microphysiological systems (MPS), are devices containing a lining of living cells grown under dynamic flow to recapitulate the important features of human physiology and pathophysiology with high precision. Recent advances in microfabrication and tissue engineering techniques have led to the wide adoption of OOC in next-generation experimental platforms. This review presents a comprehensive analysis of the OOC systems, categorizing them by flow types (single-pass and multipass), operational mechanisms (pumpless and pump-driven), and configurations (single-organ and multiorgan systems), along with their respective advantages and limitations. Furthermore, it explores the integration of qualitative and quantitative assay techniques, providing a comparative evaluation of systems with and without sensor integration. This review aims to fill essential knowledge gaps, driving the progress of the development of OOC systems and paving the way for breakthroughs in biomedical research, pharmaceutical innovation, and tissue engineering.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.