Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 250

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of enzymatic and non-enzymatic glucose sensors based on hierarchical Au-Ni alloy with conductive polymer

Lee, Won-Chul, Kim, Kwang-Bok, Gurudatt, N.G., Hussain, Khalil K., Choi, Cheol Soo, Park, Deog-Su, Shim, Yoon-Bo·2019·Biosensors and Bioelectronics

Abstract

Enzymatic and non-enzymatic amperometric glucose sensors based on nanostructured Au-Ni alloy were prepared and compared in their performance. The hierarchically structured Au-Ni surface was merely used for the non-enzymatic glucose sensor, while glucose oxidase attached poly-3'(benzoic acid) -2,2':5',2'- terthiophene (pTBA) formed on the alloy surface was used as the enzymatic sensor. The fabricated sensor was characterized using surface analysis and electrochemical experiments. In case of the enzymatic sensor, the anodic current of H2O2 generated from the enzyme reaction was used as the analytical signal, while the direct oxidation of glucose was observed on a mere Au-Ni alloy electrode without enzyme immobilization, which shows an excellent catalytic oxidation of glucose even in physiological pH. The potential pulse pretreatment of the sensor surfaces improved the performance, which allowed both the sensors reproducible and reusable (enzymatic sensor: coefficient of variation = 1.82%, n = 5, non-enzymatic: coefficient of variation = 2.93%). The enzymatic biosensor reveals the advantages of increased sensitivity, selectivity, and stability, compared with the non-enzymatic sensor. The linear range of enzymatic sensor was attained from 1.0 µM to 30.0 mM with a detection limit of 0.29 μM. The reliabilities of the sensors were also demonstrated through the glucose analysis in human blood samples, and the result was compared with the commercially available glucometer.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bios.2019.01.028

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 250

Metadata

Authors
Lee, W.-C., Kim, K.-B., Gurudatt, N. G., Hussain, K. K., Choi, C. S., Park, D.-S., & Shim, Y.-B.
Venue
Biosensors and Bioelectronics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-04
Volume
130
Pages
48-54
ISSN
0956-5663 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2911393369
Cited by
250
References
4
FWCI
11.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of enzymatic and non-enzymatic glucose sensors based on hierarchical Au-Ni alloy with conductive polymer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.bios.2019.01.028
The paper
Lee, W.-C., Kim, K.-B., Gurudatt, N. G., Hussain, K. K., Choi, C. S., Park, D.-S., & Shim, Y.-B. (2019). Comparison of enzymatic and non-enzymatic glucose sensors based on hierarchical Au-Ni alloy with conductive polymer. Biosensors and Bioelectronics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2019.01.028

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.