The DOI matches its Crossref record; 244 of the 246 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 236 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices
Open accessAbstract
ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEPREVReviewNEXTBiocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring DevicesScott P. Nichols†, Ahyeon Koh†, Wesley L. Storm†, Jae Ho Shin‡, and Mark H. Schoenfisch*†View Author Information† Department of Chemistry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599, United States‡ Department of Chemistry, Kwangwoon University, Seoul, Korea*Address: Chemistry Department of Chemistry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, CB#3290, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 27599, USA. Tel: +1 (919) 843-8714. Fax: +1 (919) 962-2388. E-mail: [email protected]Cite this: Chem. Rev. 2013, 113, 4, 2528–2549Publication Date (Web):February 7, 2013Publication History Received19 September 2012Published online7 February 2013Published inissue 10 April 2013https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/cr300387jhttps://doi.org/10.1021/cr300387jreview-articleACS PublicationsCopyright © 2013 American Chemical SocietyRequest reuse permissionsArticle Views8353Altmetric-Citations268LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InRedditEmail Other access optionsGet e-Alertsclose SUBJECTS:Anatomy,Carbohydrates,Inflammation,Peptides and proteins,Sensors Get e-Alerts
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
190 Not checked yet · 37 Own interpretation · 26 No basis given · 1 Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Accurate glucose measurements were carried out for >1 year by taking into account the difference in oxygen reduction at an electrode producing a glucose-modulated current and a reference electrode producing an oxygen-dependent current.31”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.2. Short-term and long-term electrochemical implantable glucose sensors (fully implantable versus percutaneous)
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [31] Gough D. A., 2010, Sci. Transl. Med. source
The Results (Sensing Principle) describe glucose oxidase and catalase, a glucose-modulated oxygen electrode, a reference oxygen electrode, and subtraction of their currents to obtain the glucose signal. The Results (Implantation and Accuracy; page numbers unavailable) report operation for 520 days in one pig and glucose measurements assessed for accuracy in the diabetic animals. The finding is in pigs, not humans. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Optical detection of glucose via near infrared (NIR) spectroscopy enables 90–95% of the light to pass through the human stratum corneum and epidermis into subcutaneous space with minimal tissue adsorption independent of skin pigmentation.19,40–41”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.3. Glucose detection based on optical approaches or combination technologies
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides real-time information on trends (i.e., whether the glucose levels are increasing or decreasing), magnitude, duration, and frequency of glucose fluctuations during the day.5–6”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Frequent calibration (e.g., 2 times per day) is required even after the stabilization period due to changes in sensor response.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.2. Short-term and long-term electrochemical implantable glucose sensors (fully implantable versus percutaneous)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The subcutaneous nature of the sensors likely minimized any micromotion effects associated with the foreign body response.32”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.2. Short-term and long-term electrochemical implantable glucose sensors (fully implantable versus percutaneous)
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] Helton K. L., 2011, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Due to their ability to be miniaturized and give high selectivity and sensitivity governed by the specific biocatalytic reactions of an immobilized enzyme, electrochemical biosensors are among the most widely studied devices.4”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.1. Electrochemical continuous glucose monitoring biosensors
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4] Wang J., 2008, Chem. Rev. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As described earlier, the use of mediators to shuttle electrons between the enzyme and the electrode can also minimize the impact of interfering species by lowering the working potential required to oxidize hydrogen peroxide.56,58,62”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.1. Interferences
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A one-point calibration is thus considered more appropriate.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.4. In vivo calibration
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, deactivation by endogenously produced hydrogen peroxide from oxidase reactions also contributes to the loss of activity.71”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.3. Stability and degradation of sensor components
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [71] Tse P. H. S., 1987, Biotechnol. Bioeng. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Sensor performance issues due to changing oxygen levels are exacerbated due to the foreign body response that results in local consumption of oxygen and glucose by inflammatory cells at the vicinity of the sensor.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.2. Oxygen dependence
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition to the inherent sensor fabrication and analytical measurement challenges, patient variability is an equally important factor for CGM device utility.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.5. Physiological fluctuations and sensor performance
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“These materials are prone to degradation from oxidative challenges (i.e., foreign body response), calcification, and delamination.73”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.3. Stability and degradation of sensor components
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [73] Zhao Q., 1991, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Such behavior was attributed in part to blood occlusion due to pressures applied to tissue adjacent to the sensor.86–87”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.5. Physiological fluctuations and sensor performance
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, frequent calibration using intermittent glucose monitoring (via finger pricks) is still required due to erratic analytical performance.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.4. Commercially available glucose sensors
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Temperature fluctuations in subcutaneous tissue will also impact sensor performance by altering glucose oxidase activity.61”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.5. Physiological fluctuations and sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [61] Myrer J. W., 1997, J. Athletic Training
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Permselective membranes via size exclusion and/or electrostatic repulsion are often used to improve selectivity.4”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.1. Interferences
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4] Wang J., 2008, Chem. Rev. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While the above design, fabrication, and use criteria are of importance to CGM device use, none impacts the bioanalytical and clinical utility as much as the foreign body response (FBR).”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“External pressure on the CGM sensor has also become a valid threat to analytical performance.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.5. Physiological fluctuations and sensor performance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since percutaneous sensors are implanted through the epidermis, dermis, and subcutaneous layers, the effects of tissue heterogeneity are relevant to the analytical performance of the sensor.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.5. Physiological fluctuations and sensor performance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Of note, the oxygen diffusion to the sensor decays exponentially after sensor implantation due to changes in tissue permeability.31”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.2. Oxygen dependence
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [31] Gough D. A., 2010, Sci. Transl. Med. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Clinical implementation of a SERS biosensor would require implantation of a device that could lead to photothermal damage of nearby tissue due to constant irradiation by the laser source.30”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.3. Glucose detection based on optical approaches or combination technologies
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [30] Vashist S. K., 2012, Anal. Chim. Acta source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The lag time between blood and subcutaneous tissue glucose concentrations cause further inaccuracies for CGM devices.79–80”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.4. In vivo calibration
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This assumption is problematic because the ratio of blood/tissue glucose is not constant, but rather depends on the metabolic rates related to glucose and insulin physiology including glucose uptake by cells or from blood vessels, blood flow, and permeability of capillaries.78”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.4. In vivo calibration
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [78] Cengiz E., 2009, Diabetes Technol. Ther. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, a number of interferences (e.g., acetaminophen, ascorbic acid, and uric acid) can affect sensor response as they are electroactive at the electrode potential used to oxidize hydrogen peroxide.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.1. Interferences
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Indeed, low concentrations of oxygen lead to problems with the biosensor response to glucose (particularly dynamic range) due to stoichiometric imbalance between the two cofactors.19,63”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.2. Oxygen dependence
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] Vaddiraju S., 2010, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
- Not checked yetcites [63] Wilson G. S., 2009
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The failure of sensor components in vivo may be categorized as follows: 1) enzyme instability and leaching; 2) membrane degradation and delamination; and, 3) electrode passivation.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.3. Stability and degradation of sensor components
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Enzyme activity begins to decrease immediately both due to polymer entrapment and exposure to reactive oxidative species from sensor operation and the FBR (exposure to hydrogen peroxide and other reactive radicals).71–72”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.3. Stability and degradation of sensor components
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, even properly immobilized enzymes inherently lose activity over time due primarily to loss of non-covalently bonded FAD cofactor.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.3. Stability and degradation of sensor components
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Longer, or unpredictable, lag times are created by physiological differences between individuals, intrinsic sensor lag time (typically on the order of seconds to a few minutes), and noise filtering.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.4. In vivo calibration
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Polyphenol permselective membranes are able to electropolymerize within an enzyme layer in a controllable manner, yielding a film with a thickness that is self-limiting (10–100 nm).”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.1. Interferences
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Under normal conditions (i.e., conditions in which glucose levels are not rapidly changing from activities such as exercising or eating), the physiological lag time between blood and interstitial fluid glucose ranges between 5 and 10 min.78,81”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.4. In vivo calibration
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In some cases, such membranes also exclude surface-active macromolecules (i.e., proteins and platelets), protecting the surface from biofouling.61”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.1. Interferences
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [61] Myrer J. W., 1997, J. Athletic Training
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Lag is also created by tissue responses to the sensor such as electrode fouling, biofouling, and the foreign body encapsulation that impedes glucose diffusion to the sensor.5–6”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.4. In vivo calibration
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Although sensor accuracy is critical for compliance, many reports in the literature often neglect selectivity for glucose over interfering species during characterization.54”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.1. Interferences
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [54] Klonoff, D.; Bernhardt, P.; Ginsberg, B. H.; Joseph, J.; Mastrototaro, J.; Parker, D. R.; Vesper, H.; Vigersky, R.Performance Metrics for Continuous Interstitial Glucose Monitoring; Approved Guideline;Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute:Wayne, PA, 2008.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The composition of such membranes must be accounted for when considering biocompatibility as the polymer contacts tissue and may ultimately dictate the foreign body response (FBR).”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.1. Interferences
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“glucose sensor performance in mast cell-sufficient mice was erratic with temporary response loss occurring within the first 3 weeks.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [106] Klueh U., 2010, Biomaterials source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The observed biofouling was found to have only relatively small direct effects on the overall resistance and glucose extraction efficiency.104”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [104] Wisniewski N., 2001, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Most long-term medical implants to date are considered biocompatible or inert once the FBR resolves and the device is encapsulated by a collagen layer.89”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [89] Ratner B. D., 2007, Polym. Int. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As blood vessels are the primary source of glucose, such encapsulation hinders accurate measurements of blood glucose.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The vessel length and perfusion of the vasculature increased during the implantation period (i.e., 14 d).”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [109] Koschwanez H. E., 2010, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“further indicating a link between mast cell action and erratic glucose sensor performance.106”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [106] Klueh U., 2010, Biomaterials source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Instantaneously, proteins adhere to the biomaterial surface in a process referred to as biofouling.91–92”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the resistance to mass transfer of analyte (i.e., glucose) caused by the tissue over both short- (3 h) and long-term (8 d) implantation periods were typically 3 to 5 times greater than that caused by biofouling of the probes, regardless of implantation period.104”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [104] Wisniewski N., 2001, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While preventing all macrophage migration and subsequent phagocytosis at a wound (glucose sensor) is unlikely, the activation state (i.e., M1 or M2) of the macrophage may influence the overall FBR.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“indicating that angiogenesis is not the only factor in assessing the biocompatibility of CGM sensors.109”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [109] Koschwanez H. E., 2010, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As shown in Figure 2, the FBR initiates upon the insertion of almost any material into subcutaneous tissue, starting with the creation of a wound and the wound healing cascade.90–91”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As part of the FBR, macrophages, monocytes, mast cells, and fibroblasts are recruited to the implant site to initiate clearance of the foreign body by releasing chemokines and cytokines.90–91”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“found biofouling effects to actually be minimal.104”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [104] Wisniewski N., 2001, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Glucose sensitivity correlated well with the collagen encapsulation of the sponges with thicker collagen resulting in greater sensitivity loss.108”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [108] Dungel P., 2008, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The concentrations and types of mediators released elicit further cell recruitment and ultimately phagocytosis93 as the body attempts to digest the implant.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [93] Luttikhuizen D. T., 2006, Tissue Eng. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The initial protein adsorption is an integral part of the overall FBR as the ensuing interface promotes the adhesion of inflammatory cells that subsequently stimulate blood clotting and the development of a provisional matrix.92”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [92] Wilson C. J., 2005, Tissue Eng. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After one to two weeks, inflammatory cells deposit a collagen matrix that sequesters the implant from the native tissue.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Histology samples from both experimental groups confirmed that the mast cell-deficient mice exhibited reduced fibrosis and inflammation at the implantation site.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [106] Klueh U., 2010, Biomaterials source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the majority of the biofouling proteins on the sensor membrane were fragments <15 kDa.102–103”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For example, FBGC formation on polyurethanes has been shown to promote cracking of the underlying biomaterial.73”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [73] Zhao Q., 1991, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the initial adhesion of proteins and cells onto a glucose sensor dampens sensor performance.100–101”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [100] Thomé-Duret V., 1996, Diabetes Metab.
- Not checked yetcites [101] Gerritsen M., 2001, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“While the immediately explanted sensors had glucose sensitivities similar to those analyzed in vivo”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [100] Thomé-Duret V., 1996, Diabetes Metab.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Despite such increases in vasculature, the sensitivity of the sensor did not increase”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [109] Koschwanez H. E., 2010, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although CGM devices have a similar fate, the combination of the FBR, oxygen and glucose availability, and need for immediate calibration and use (e.g., in the physician’s office), have significantly impeded their utility and implementation as effective devices for diabetes management.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As the FBR progresses, frustrated phagocytosis from activated macrophages will lead to the fusion of macrophages into foreign body giant cells (FBGCs) that attempt to further breakdown the implant.73,94,97–98”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Diffusion of the fluorescein through the explanted capsules was ~50% that of normal (i.e., subcutaneous) tissue.107”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [107] Sharkawy A. A., 1997, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This collagen encapsulation lacks the microvasculature of native tissue.99”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [99] Sieminski A. L., 2000, Biomaterials source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The extent of capsule development is dependent on all other preceding components of the FBR, including protein adhesion, cell activation, and cytokine signaling.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this technique is highly invasive involving implantation of additional materials (i.e., an optical window) that inherently elicits an additional tissue reaction with influence on the overall FBR to the closely placed biomaterial.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“their outcomes are not an accurate predictor of biocompatibility or glucose sensor performance in vivo.70,112”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Diabetics typically suffer from delayed and diminished wound healing.127”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [127] Blakytny R., 2006, Diabetic Med. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the wide range of available diabetic models in animals (e.g., genetic or chemically induced) may further complicate comparisons between studies.129”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [129] Le N. N., 2011, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“that clearly could influence glucose sensor performance.128”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [128] Gerritsen H., 2000, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“testing in animal models is necessary to evaluate the intricate tissue reactions that confront a proposed biomaterial and fully represent FBR complexity.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it does not offer a complete analysis of the FBR as no information is gained with respect to collagen capsule formation, capillary density in the surrounding tissue, or sensor performance.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the capsule thickness was ~20% thinner surrounding the smaller implant.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115] Ward W. K., 2002, Biomaterials source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Subcutaneous histology of a porous poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA) coating showed a threefold increase in vascularization and a ~65% reduction in collagen compared to bare glucose sensors at 3 weeks.121”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [121] Koschwanez H. E., 2008, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“At 10 and 14 d post-implantation, the vessel lengths and blood perfusion of the porous materials was significantly greater than bare (i.e., non-porous) sensor coatings when implanted subcutaneously.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [109] Koschwanez H. E., 2010, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Picha et al. found that implant location within the subcutaneous tissue affects the FBR.132”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [132] Picha G. J., 1996, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This reduction was explained by the clot formation around the sensing portion of the CGM device that formed a glucose sink until clearance.133”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [133] Klueh U., 2011, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“this study demonstrates that sensor geometry may be an important factor in determining biocompatibility.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [130] Li D. J., 1999, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As such, it is likely not an accurate characterization of sensor performance or the FBR.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the cage implant allows for the examination of the inflammatory response to a substrate of interest over time.113”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [113] Marchant R., 1983, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the injection of blood, but not saline or plasma, led to a temporary (i.e., several hours) signal reduction that eventually returned to normal.133”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [133] Klueh U., 2011, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the ratio of the glucose concentration in the dialysate to that in blood were significantly different between rats and humans indicating differences in the relative glucose availability in the tissue surrounding an implanted device.126”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [126] Wisniewski N., 2002, Am. J. Physiol.-Endocrinol. Metab source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The dialysate concentrations were significantly different for all metabolites in rats and humans throughout the first 6 days of the experiment, with the exception of glycerol on day 0.126”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [126] Wisniewski N., 2002, Am. J. Physiol.-Endocrinol. Metab source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Despite these observations, the same materials implanted percutaneously resulted in no observable differences.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [109] Koschwanez H. E., 2010, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Changes in cellular glucose uptake and the capsule diffusion coefficient of glucose had little effect on simulated sensor performance.111”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [111] Novak M. T., 2010, Anal. Bioanal. Chem. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The positive correlation between lag time and capsule thickness supported the models described above.107,110–111”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The two greatest factors in reducing sensor attenuation were a low capsule density and high degree of angiogenesis.111”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [111] Novak M. T., 2010, Anal. Bioanal. Chem. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Later studies by Mercado and Moussy demonstrated that this breakdown was likely caused by mineralization of the membrane.135”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [135] Mercado R. C., 1998, Biosens. Bioelectron. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The sensors were found to accurately track the glucose with relatively short lag times (~4.5 min).”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [137] Ward W. K., 2002, Biosens. Bioelectron. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“again indicating that a pore size on the order of cellular dimensions was optimal for minimizing the FBR.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [153] Sharkawy A. A., 1998, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Based on the results of this study, the pro-angiogenic properties reported previously with either smaller or larger pore-sized materials might be the consequence of their polydispersity.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“These effects overrode the benefits of porosity due to the continual movement of the percutaneously implanted sensor in the tissue.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [121] Koschwanez H. E., 2008, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Despite the observed histological benefits, the analytical performance of control sensors (i.e., lacking collagen) was better than that of the collagen-based sensors.148”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [148] Ju Y. M., 2010, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Thus, incorporating strategies that reduced the effects of micromotion may be critical to fully realize the potential of porous membranes on percutaneous sensors.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [121] Koschwanez H. E., 2008, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the body ultimately overwhelms the interface with protein and cell adsorption, resulting in an equally non-native surface.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the diffusion coefficient of fluorescein through the surrounding explanted tissue was measured and determined to be approximately two times greater adjacent to porous versus non-porous PVA.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [107] Sharkawy A. A., 1997, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Their longevity was attributed to reduced fibrous encapsulation and immune cells adjacent to the hydrogel-coated as revealed by histological analysis of the surrounding tissue.147”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [147] Yu B. Z., 2008, Biosens. Bioelectron. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Cao et al. reported a decrease in collagen capsule thickness for polycaprolactone fibers when their orientation was either aligned (~5 fold reduction) or random (~9 fold reduction) compared to solid films made from the same polymer.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Ratner and coworkers have fabricated porous materials with high precision both in terms of size (±5%) and connectivity.157–158”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [157] Marshall A. J., 2004, ACS Polym. Prepr.
- Not checked yetcites [158] Ratner B. D., 2009, ACS Polym. Prepr.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The membranes with the larger pores also showed increased vascularization at the one year mark.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [155] Brauker J. H., 1995, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, four of the five sensors failed to produce analytically useful data due to either electronic failure or a lack of integration into the surrounding tissue.85”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [85] Gilligan B. C., 2004, Diabetes Technol. Ther. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The difference in performance between the two implant modes was attributed by the authors to micromotion.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [121] Koschwanez H. E., 2008, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The porous materials described above (i.e., polymer foams and salt-templated polymers) are generally characterized as having broad distributions in pore size.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“details about the specific pore sizes needed for optimum tissue integration are lacking..”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The alignment and orientation of the electrospun fibers also modulate the FBR.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“substrates with the hydrogel coating had markedly less fibrous encapsulation relative to controls.143”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [143] Quinn C. P., 1995, Biomaterials source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, coatings on percutaneous sensors did not lead to similar histological or sensor performance improvements versus control (i.e., bare) sensors.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [121] Koschwanez H. E., 2008, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, macrophages on non-porous implants were more likely to be in the inflammatory phenotype.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Membranes fabricated with the larger pores were characterized by 80–100x greater vascularization in the tissue surrounding the implant.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [155] Brauker J. H., 1995, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Histological analysis after the experiment revealed improved biocompatibility of the NDGA-crosslinked compared to the GA-cross-linked scaffolds as evidenced by less inflammatory cell localization and infiltration into the porous membranes.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [148] Ju Y. M., 2010, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In long-term studies (i.e., 10 weeks), biodegradation of PU was slower for polycarbonate PUs, containing a soft segment of polyhexamethylene carbonate, compared to polyether Pus that have a soft segment composed of polytetramethylene oxide.138”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [138] Mathur A. B., 1997, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“small fibers (<6 μm in diameter)151,163 reduce the FBR (i.e., capsule formation) more effectively than larger (>6 μm) fibers.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“When implanted subcutaneously, materials with 35 μm pores were shown to yield the thinnest and lowest density collagen capsules with a high degree of capillaries in the tissue.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [157] Marshall A. J., 2004, ACS Polym. Prepr.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“this increased vascularization correlated with the ability of inflammatory cells to infiltrate the porous membrane.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [155] Brauker J. H., 1995, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“significant inflammation and the development of FBGCs were reported for VEGF-“producing” biosensors.204”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [204] Klueh U., 2005, Biomaterials source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“systemic use of DX can cause serious side-effects by depressing the innate immune response, thus increasing the likelihood of infection.178–179”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“lower modulus fibers (e.g., polyurethane) showing reduced capsule formation (i.e., size) compared to higher modulus materials (e.g., polyethylene, polyester and poly(L-lactic acid)).151”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [151] Sanders J. E., 2003, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the above studies contrast significantly with respect to the delivery methods, materials, and animal models, and thus the significance of VEGF/DX dual delivery for tissue reconstruction remains questionable.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The release of DX reduced the inflammatory response by ~50% at 3 and 7 d compared to control PLGA/PVA hydrogel composites.188”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [188] Patil S. D., 2004, Diabetes Technol. Ther. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“While an initial burst release of ~15% of total DX was observed, the PLGA particles provided approximate zero-order kinetic release of DX over one month, indicating potential for long-term delivery.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [184] Hickey T., 2002, Biomaterials source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Clarke Error Grid Analysis indicated that only sensors 1 mm from the VEGF-eluting pumps showed accuracy improvements versus controls.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [203] Ward W. K., 2004, Diabetes Technol. Ther.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Norton et al. observed no real benefit in reducing the inflammatory response using DX-releasing PLGA microspheres after 2 or 6 weeks in rat subcutaneous tissue.191”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [191] Norton L. W., 2007, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the modulii of the dermis and subcutaneous tissue range from 56–260 kPa and 0.12–23 kPa, respectively,165–168”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.5. Material modulus
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“glucocorticoids including DX have been shown to decrease the in vivo activity of VEGF.207–209”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The combination of these two PLGA systems could provide constant DX delivery for more than one month.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“biphasic decreases in IL-6 expression (i.e., a pro-inflammatory cytokine) were observed at the lowest and highest modulii.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.5. Material modulus
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [170] Irwin E. F., 2008, J. Biomater. Sci.-Polym E source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Moussy et al. reported that [3H]DX travelled only an average of 2.70 mm from the point of delivery after 24 h when administered locally.180”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [180] Moussy Y., 2006, Biotechnol. Prog. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Histological analysis revealed decreases in macrophage concentrations adjacent to implants 2 mm from the osmotic pump at 4 weeks, while tissue samples ≥17 mm away were not significantly different.181”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [181] Ward W. K., 2010, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“mismatches in the elastic modulus between an implant and the skin that surrounds it will result in sheer forces that induce a more severe FBR.164”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.5. Material modulus
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [164] Holt B., 2008, J. Biomech. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“physical and chemical alterations to CGM devices at the sensor-tissue interface have not resulted in drastically improved glucose sensor function to date.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“a materials’ modulus is an important factor for modulating the FBR to percutaneous biosensors on non-porous materials as well.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study clearly indicated that DX must be delivered continuously (i.e., for the duration of an implant) in order to manifest the anti-inflammatory benefits.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The authors attributed the lack of significant glucose sensor performance improvements to VEGF-induced pro-inflammatory effects.203”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [203] Ward W. K., 2004, Diabetes Technol. Ther.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Ultimately, local inflammation was 2–4 fold greater near the VEGF-releasing materials relative to control substrates over the entire four-week study.189”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [189] Patil S. D., 2007, J. Controlled Release source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A concern regarding VEGF use is increased local inflammation because cell migration and proliferation also correlate with angiogenesis.200–201”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Patil et al. implanted VEGF-releasing PLGA/PVA hydrogel composites into rat subcutaneous tissue and noted through histology that capillary density was significantly increased at 3 and 4 weeks after implantation versus controls (PVA hydrogels).189”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [189] Patil S. D., 2007, J. Controlled Release source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Irwin and coworkers observed a reduction in macrophage adhesion as the modulus of an interpenetrating polymer network was decreased from 348 to 1.4 kPa.170”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.5. Material modulus
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [170] Irwin E. F., 2008, J. Biomater. Sci.-Polym E source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unfortunately, the development of analytically accurate in vivo sensors that function for extended (i.e., at least weeks) periods remains a shortcoming and insurmountable challenge due to the FBR.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 6. Conclusions
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nitric oxide may therefore be able to accomplish the hypothesized actions of dual DX/VEGF while avoiding the antagonistic behavior between the drugs.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Work by Nichols et al. examined the influence of NO-release duration and payload ranging from 6 h to 14 d and 2.7 to 9.3 Vmol cm−2, respectively, on the FBR using 316L stainless steel wires as model sensors (with respect to size) coated with different NO release formulations.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [240] Nichols S. P., 2012, Biomaterials source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Given NO’s roles in the immune response, favorable tissue reactions to NO-releasing substrates would be expected in vivo.217”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [217] Carpenter A. W., 2012, Chem. Soc. Rev. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The NO-releasing probes after 7 d were reported to recover larger glucose concentrations compared to controls (Figure 4), indicating lower resistance to mass transfer in the surrounding tissue.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [239] Nichols S. P., 2011, Anal. Chem. source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The authors concluded that the mitigated FBR by NO release was thus at least partially responsible for the superior glucose recovery.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [239] Nichols S. P., 2011, Anal. Chem. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“NO is also believed to control inflammatory cell recruitment in the early stages of the FBR.215”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [215] Schwentker A., 2002, Nitric Oxide-Biol. Chem. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This work suggests that NO release may represent an important strategy for improving in vivo glucose sensor performance.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In contrast to the capsule thickness, inflammation was only affected by substrates still actively releasing NO at time of explants.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [240] Nichols S. P., 2012, Biomaterials source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The angiogenic behavior exhibited by NO may thus prove helpful for avoiding the avascular encapsulation that plagues glucose sensor performance.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Based on studies to date, the anti-inflammatory influence by localized (i.e., surface) NO release persist only during the release event.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“While these studies highlight the effect of NO release on the FBR”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the analytical performance of percutaneous NO-releasing sensors in rats was improved by 2.4 and 2.1% (Clarke Error Grid Analysis) for the NO-releasing sensors relative to controls on days 1 and 3, respectively.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [103] Gifford R., 2005, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These results indicate that the short-term benefits reported by Gifford et al. may be further enhanced with a greater and more sustained NO release profile.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“NO influences the FBR in ways that may affect in vivo glucose sensor performance.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recent insights regarding specific in vivo impediments to sensor function have helped form strategies to reduce inflammation and improve tissue integration of sensor materials”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 6. Conclusions
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The outer sensor membrane protects the enzyme.
- Rests on an assumption: The outer sensor membrane tunes the sensor response.
- Rests on an assumption: The outer sensor membrane determines the magnitude of the foreign body response.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and its potential to improve glucose sensor performance”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 93
- Probably not a substantial claim. 15
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the continuous applied current causes skin erythema and irritation.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.1. Electrochemical continuous glucose monitoring biosensors
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Photobleaching of the fluorophore and scattering in tissue are significant drawbacks.19,35–36”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.3. Glucose detection based on optical approaches or combination technologies
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Enzyme-immobilized amperometric biosensors have been implanted fully subcutaneously as CGM devices for extended periods (months to years) or percutaneously for <1 month.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.2. Short-term and long-term electrochemical implantable glucose sensors (fully implantable versus percutaneous)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Unfortunately, most mediators are toxic and competition between the mediator and oxygen still exists.19,22”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.1. Electrochemical continuous glucose monitoring biosensors
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] Vaddiraju S., 2010, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
- Not checked yetcites [22]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Microdialysis avoids direct implantation of a sensor but the glucose measurement (i.e., recovery) remains erratic in vivo due to the foreign body response.19,24–25”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.1. Electrochemical continuous glucose monitoring biosensors
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Additionally, sweating, often associated with hypoglycemia, affects the rate of extraction of glucose and therefore causes erroneous results when readings must be most accurate.29–30”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.1. Electrochemical continuous glucose monitoring biosensors
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although enzyme-based electrochemical glucose biosensors are characterized with high selectivity and sensitivity due their enzymatic nature, the dynamic range of such sensors is limited by co-substrate (i.e., oxygen) availability.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.1. Electrochemical continuous glucose monitoring biosensors
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Almost all invasive sensing devices are characterized by infection risks, discomfort, and analytical response issues related to the foreign body response (FBR).29–30”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.3. Glucose detection based on optical approaches or combination technologies
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Moreover, miniaturization of the instrumentation is not currently possible thus precluding personalized devices for continuous monitoring.19”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.3. Glucose detection based on optical approaches or combination technologies
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] Vaddiraju S., 2010, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Iontophoretic electrochemical sensors are not invasive and experience less fouling because of the skin’s ability to filter large biomolecules.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.1. Electrochemical continuous glucose monitoring biosensors
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though such sensors typically are characterized as having a shorter stabilization period (e.g., 2–4 h) compared to subcutaneous glucose sensors, the device penetrates through an opening in the dermis with concomitant infection risk.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.2. Short-term and long-term electrochemical implantable glucose sensors (fully implantable versus percutaneous)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While Raman spectroscopy gives narrow and distinct peaks (in contrast to NIR absorbance), long spectral acquisition and stabilization times are required.30”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.3. Glucose detection based on optical approaches or combination technologies
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [30] Vashist S. K., 2012, Anal. Chim. Acta source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“While optical detection provides sensitive detection without damaging the host, skin pigmentation and epidermal thickness can negatively impact the analytical response among hosts.35–36”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.3. Glucose detection based on optical approaches or combination technologies
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Additionally, the working electrode potential required to monitor hydrogen peroxide (i.e., ~+0.6 V vs. Ag/AgCl) will also oxidize electroactive endogenous species (e.g., ascorbic acid and acetaminophen) and create high current densities.19”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.1. Electrochemical continuous glucose monitoring biosensors
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] Vaddiraju S., 2010, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Electrode fouling (often called electrode passivation) is another cause of sensor instability, and occurs when diffusible small molecules come into contact with the surface of the electrode after penetration of the sensor membrane.74”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.3. Stability and degradation of sensor components
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [74] Wisniewski N., 2000, Colloid. Surface. B source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“For example, Gilligan et al. found that long-term implanted glucose sensors in humans provided accurate sensor readings while immobile, but posture changes (i.e., standing and/or moving) led to erratic outputs.85”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.5. Physiological fluctuations and sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [85] Gilligan B. C., 2004, Diabetes Technol. Ther. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, these sensors are not intended as warning or prognostic devices but rather as tools to inform users and physicians of trends in glucose fluctuations.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.4. Commercially available glucose sensors
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Current numerical and clinical accuracy criteria for CGM includes linear regressions and correlation coefficients; mean (or median) absolute and relative absolute difference (MAD and MARD); Clarke Error Grid Analysis (Clarke EGA); and, International Standard Organization (ISO) criteria.76”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.4. In vivo calibration
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [76] Clarke W. L., 2007, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unfortunately, the changes in blood dielectric properties are not specific to glucose, resulting in poor accuracy.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.3. Glucose detection based on optical approaches or combination technologies
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Subcutaneous oxygen tension for humans ranges from 40 mm Hg (~5 kPa) to 130 mm Hg (~17kPa) with partial pressures affected by anesthetics and hypoxia at the implantation site.70”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.2. Oxygen dependence
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [70] Koschwanez H. E., 2007, Biomaterials source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Pressures as low as 2 kPa have been shown to diminish blood flow near the skin while only 7 kPa completely occluded blood circulation in diabetic patients whereas non-diabetics withstood pressures up to 22 kPa before total blood occlusion.88”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.5. Physiological fluctuations and sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [88] Petrofsky J. S., 2011, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Because CGM systems also provide information on glucose fluctuations, the continuous glucose-error grid (CG-EGA) has been introduced comprising of (1) a point-error grid analysis (P-EGA) that evaluates the sensor accuracy in terms of accurate blood glucose measurements; and, (2) a rate-error grid analysis (R-EGA) that assesses the prediction capability of the sensor.77”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.4. In vivo calibration
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [77] Kovatchev B. P., 2004, Diabetes Care source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Oxygen concentration in interstitial fluid is approximately ten times lower than the concentration of glucose in interstitial fluid resulting in an “oxygen deficit” state that is addressed by an outer diffusion-controlled membrane.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.2. Oxygen dependence
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since the analytical performance of CGM sensors changes drastically upon implantation, methods for defining and assessing sensor accuracy are critical for clinical use.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.4. In vivo calibration
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even with an accurate calibration, repeated calibration is required as the sensor sensitivity changes over time due to physiological fluctuations and the foreign body response to the sensor.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.4. In vivo calibration
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Since 1999, CGM systems have been approved by the FDA but only percutaneously implanted electrochemical glucose sensors are currently for sale in the United States.53”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.4. Commercially available glucose sensors
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [53] Henning T., 2010
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The electrochemical detection of hydrogen peroxide requires oxygen, a cofactor in the GOx enzymatic reaction.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 3. Issues in bioanalytical performance > 3.2. Oxygen dependence
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Recent advances have demonstrated that surface enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) dramatically decreases acquisition times with concomitant improvements in both sensitivity and limit of detection.45–46”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.3. Glucose detection based on optical approaches or combination technologies
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Due to finite FDA-regulated sensor lifetimes (5–7 d), the biosensor must be replaced on a regular basis with significant financial burden on the individual patient.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 2. Continuous glucose monitoring technologies > 2.4. Commercially available glucose sensors
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“empirical data suggests that lag times range from 10–15 min in vivo, indicating the integral function of angiogenesis in early granulation tissue.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, this reversibility indicated that the process was passive and likely caused by biofouling on the sensor.100”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [100] Thomé-Duret V., 1996, Diabetes Metab.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Sensor lag times for native tissue was estimated at ~20 min, but tripled when modeled with decreased diffusion due to a capsule.107”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [107] Sharkawy A. A., 1997, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Indeed, macrophages serve three primary functions in the body: host defense, wound healing, and immune regulation.95”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [95] Mosser D. M., 2008, Nat. Rev. Immunol. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While glucose sensor performance recovered soon after injection (~15 min), the sensor response to glucose decreased after 1–2 days”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [106] Klueh U., 2010, Biomaterials source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This process can result in a local pH’s dropping as low as 3.6 and disrupting biosensor performance as the activity of GOx is pH dependent.94”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [94] Zhao Q. H., 1993, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The glucose sensitivity in vivo peaked at day 7, but then decreased for the duration of the study.108”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [108] Dungel P., 2008, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Sensor performance in mast cell-deficient mice was markedly better with reliable sensor function throughout the 28-day period.106”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [106] Klueh U., 2010, Biomaterials source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“microdialysis probes consume significantly more glucose than electrochemical glucose sensors and therefore may underestimate the effects of biofouling in vivo.105”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [105] Lowry J. P., 1998, J. Neurochem. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“response to glucose improved after rinsing, albeit not to pre-implantation levels.100”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [100] Thomé-Duret V., 1996, Diabetes Metab.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The collagen encapsulation will persist for the lifetime of the device, negatively impacting sensor performance with respect to sensitivity and response (e.g., lag times).”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The Tecoflex SG-85A membrane provided the biocompatibility often observed with polyurethane while also ensuring ideal sensor performance by limiting glucose diffusion.34”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the physical properties of the implant (e.g., size) impact the FBR, and the large size of the stainless steel cage will influence the overall immune response to the materials.115”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115] Ward W. K., 2002, Biomaterials source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“At 20 months, thinner capsules were observed at the implant’s corners while the face of the implant closest to the skin had a thicker capsule than the opposite side.130”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [130] Li D. J., 1999, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Histological analysis revealed delayed neovascularization and less matrix production in the diabetic rabbits”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [128] Gerritsen H., 2000, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While examination of the subcutaneous implant noted no blood vessels or collagen within the interior of the porous material, the percutaneous experiments revealed significant levels of collagen and vascularization, indicating a differential FBR dependent on the nature (i.e., purely subcutaneous vs. percutaneous) of the implant.121”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [121] Koschwanez H. E., 2008, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Histology samplings from human subcutaneous tissue showed a high concentration of adipose cells while rat tissue was characterized with larger amounts of collagen.126”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [126] Wisniewski N., 2002, Am. J. Physiol.-Endocrinol. Metab source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the increases to mass transfer were not attributed to any specific part of the FBR and could originate from collagen capsule thickness, blood vessel density, or other unanticipated factors.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [110] Jablecki M., 2000, Anal. Chem. source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The optical tissue window enables tissue monitoring and correlation to the sensor performance.116–118”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Moussy et al. implanted Nafion-coated CGM probes into canines that proved functional for up 10 days, but ultimately the membranes were deemed unstable with significant cracking and eventual failure.122”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [122] Moussy F., 1994, Int. J. Artif. Organs source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Taken together, these results necessitate careful consideration and caution when extrapolating results from animal models to humans.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [126] Wisniewski N., 2002, Am. J. Physiol.-Endocrinol. Metab source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“While textured surfaces elicited a more favorable FBR, much of the response that did occur was attributed to differential sheer stress caused by the interaction between the textured surface of the device and the surrounding fatty tissue.132”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [132] Picha G. J., 1996, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Anesthesia is not required to observe the tissue in real-time, an important consideration for glucose sensor performance correlation as anesthesia can alter microvasculature circulation.116”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.1. Models for assessing biocompatibility
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [116] Makale M. T., 2005, Am. J. Physiol.-Heart C source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Therefore, temporary signal reductions may actually be the result of local tissue damage caused by forces exerted on the sensor and may be solved by using more flexible materials.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [133] Klueh U., 2011, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the results do identify the histological parameters of key interest when assessing the biocompatibility of materials for glucose sensors.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [111] Novak M. T., 2010, Anal. Bioanal. Chem. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“The model was ultimately used to conclude that collagen capsule thickness, a common histological parameter, was the primary source of sensor lag time with little impact on sensor response attenuation.111”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [111] Novak M. T., 2010, Anal. Bioanal. Chem. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“when the same materials were implanted percutaneously, histological differences were less apparent, with porous coatings giving a twofold increase in vascularization and a twofold increase, rather than decrease, in collagen content compared to bare sensors at 2 weeks.121”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.2. Effects of sensor geometry and physical stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [121] Koschwanez H. E., 2008, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Simulations of glucose concentration oscillations by Jablecki and Gough concluded that increases in mass transfer would increase lag and could potentially decrease the magnitude and differences when fluctuating between high and low glucose sensor signals.110”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 4. Consequences of the foreign body response on in vivo glucose sensor performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [110] Jablecki M., 2000, Anal. Chem. source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“PU allows for sufficient oxygen transport while limiting glucose diffusion to the sensor.136”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [136] Zhang Y., 1993, Anal. Chim. Acta source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The collagen encapsulation surrounding the PU-S-PEO substrates was ~45% thinner than those around the PU substrates though no differences in capillary density were observed.115”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115] Ward W. K., 2002, Biomaterials source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“When coated onto non-functioning sensors and implanted subcutaneously, the PLLA foams exhibited the expected decrease in collagen capsule thickness and increased capillary density compared to bare non-functional sensors.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [121] Koschwanez H. E., 2008, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In vitro examination of silicone-modified PU was also found to significantly inhibit adhesion and FBGC formation, possibly explaining the in vivo benefits observed.140”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [140] Jones J. A., 2004, J. Biomater. Sci., Polym. Ed. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Following subcutaneous implantation into humans, one of five biosensors functioned for ~6 months with ≥90% of all measured glucose concentrations falling within the A and B regions of the resulting Clarke Error Grid (i.e., clinically accurate and acceptable, respectively).”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [85] Gilligan B. C., 2004, Diabetes Technol. Ther. source
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The authors reported that this membrane allowed for the fabrication of functional glucose sensors in rats for up to 56 days with good sensitivity.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141] Yu B., 2006, Biosens. Bioelectron. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“poly(2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate-co-methacrylic acid) implants with 30–40 μm pores were reported to increase vascularization and reduce capsule thickness when placed into the myocardium of rats over a 4-week period.160”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [160] Madden L. R., 2010, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Even with these benefits, the accuracy was not examined and it is unclear what impact the hydrogel coating would provide in this respect.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [147] Yu B. Z., 2008, Biosens. Bioelectron. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the tissue around the porous materials exhibited increased vascularization and decreased collagen capsule thickness.107”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [107] Sharkawy A. A., 1997, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The observed vascular density adjacent to the porous PVA samples was increased relative to controls, with the 60 μm pores exhibiting the greatest vascular density”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [153] Sharkawy A. A., 1998, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“sensors lacking the ePTFE membrane (i.e., having only an underlying layer of unspecified composition) were functional for approximately 94 d with a best-case recalibration interval of 18 d.156”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [156] Updike S. J., 2000, Diabetes Care source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Hydrogel-coated biosensors were still functional after 21 days whereas only 13.5% of the controls were still functional.147”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [147] Yu B. Z., 2008, Biosens. Bioelectron. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, only one of the nine sensors functioned this long. Indeed, seven of the nine sensors lost functionality in 17 d or less.141”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141] Yu B., 2006, Biosens. Bioelectron. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results suggest that chemical modifications may improve tissue biocompatibility, but ultimately they have not led to major improvements on sensor performance in vivo.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“porous materials demonstrated a statistically significant increase in total macrophage biomarkers, yet a significant reduction (P < 0.05) in macrophage biomarkers associated with the pro-inflammatory macrophage phenotype.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Control sensor membranes (epoxy-polyurethane) at 28 days were characterized with a fibrous capsule of ~500 Vm while the capsules around hydrogel-based sensors were roughly 30–60 Vm.15”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] Wang C., 2008, Biomacromolecules source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Updike and coworkers implanted biosensors with an affixed expanded PTFE (ePTFE) membrane having 1–10 μm pores in non-diabetic canines and found they were operable for greater than 160 d with a best-case recalibration interval of 20 d.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [156] Updike S. J., 2000, Diabetes Care source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Conversely, tissue surrounding materials with either larger or smaller pores were avascular with thicker, denser collagen capsules.157”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.4. Porosity
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [157] Marshall A. J., 2004, ACS Polym. Prepr.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While Pellethane (i.e., polyurethane) control substrates exhibited significant inflammatory cell adherence and collagen encapsulation, PEG-modified hydrogels were characterized by less cells indicating improved biocompatibility.144”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.3. Polymer coatings
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [144] Quinn C. A. P., 1997, Biomaterials source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Norton et al. carefully examined the tissue response to VEGF-, DX-, and VEGF/DX-releasing hydrogels in a rat subcutaneous model,191 observing the expected increase in vascularization due to VEGF but no decrease in local inflammation from DX release.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [191] Norton L. W., 2007, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, these studies suggest that decreased inflammation likely enhances long-term glucose biosensor functionality, though the challenges of achieving long-term DX release while avoiding systemic effects remains.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“initial experiments examining the simultaneous delivery of VEGF and DX from PLGA particles showed enhanced tissue integration, decreased inflammation, and increased vascularization in a rat model.189”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [189] Patil S. D., 2007, J. Controlled Release source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“DX-releasing glucose biosensors retained >50% of their original sensitivity 2 weeks after implantation, the sensitivity of control membranes dropped to 15–42% of their original levels.187”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [187] Ju Y. M., 2010, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Histology surrounding PLGA particle-containing hydrogels with combined DX and VEGF release revealed a 50% reduction in inflammation after the first week, similar to that of DX release alone, though inflammation at weeks 2–4 was still greater than DX alone.189”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [189] Patil S. D., 2007, J. Controlled Release source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although more empirical evidence is needed, this strategy may prove helpful in reducing chronic inflammation from motion-damaged tissue.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.5. Material modulus
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“As chronic inflammation set in at ~3 weeks, the DX-releasing composites still exhibited reduced inflammation and fibrosis compared to control hydrogels, demonstrating the ability of local DX release to arrest fibrous encapsulation.188”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [188] Patil S. D., 2004, Diabetes Technol. Ther. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Vascular endothelial growth factor, or VEGF, is a cytokine released by macrophages and keratinocytes during wound reconstruction to promote angiogenesis.195–197”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Local delivery of DX from glucose biosensors was hypothesized to circumvent undesirable systemic side effects of DX.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
plainconditional- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true.
In the paper
“The functional lifetime of the sensors near the pump was 63 days whereas control (saline) sensors stopped working accurately at 34 days.203”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [203] Ward W. K., 2004, Diabetes Technol. Ther.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The acute inflammatory response was diminished at 3 and 8 d, but inflammation was significantly increased at 30 d compared to the shorter time points (i.e., 3 and 8 d), indicating that DX release simply delayed the immune response.186”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [186] Bhardwaj U., 2007, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“high concentrations of DX over 28 d (i.e., 0.17 mg/kg) led to a systemic reduction in cortisol levels while low concentrations (i.e., <0.10 mg/kg) did not cause such effects.181”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [181] Ward W. K., 2010, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Nitric oxide is an endogenously produced free radical synthesized from L-arginine by one of three isoforms of nitric oxide synthase (NOS): neuronal NOS (nNOS), endothelial NOS (eNOS), and inducible NOS (iNOS).211”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [211] Walford G., 2003, J. Thromb. Haemost. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The difference in the outcome of these studies may be the result of differences in polymer composition, DX release kinetics, and or total DX payload, clearly indicating the importance of many biomaterial parameters on tissue biocompatibility.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Within 24 h biosensors in control mice suffered large reductions in sensitivity while mice receiving the daily DX injection at the sensor site experienced sustained sensitivity and functionality through 2 weeks, regardless of DX concentration.192”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [192] Klueh U., 2007, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the polyimide material demonstrated a 94% reduction in applied strain to the surrounding tissue, while strain with the theoretical 6 MPa material was reduced by two orders of magnitude.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.5. Material modulus
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [169] Subbaroyan J., 2005, J. Neural Eng. source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These particles are simple to synthesize, enable slow DX release, and biodegrade over 2–3 months.183”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [183] Burgess D., 1994
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The combined use of these factors was thus hypothesized to decrease inflammation and enhance vascularization.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
plainconditional- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Dexamethasone (DX) is a glucocorticoid that reduces inflammation.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“research to date is still in early stages with respect to NO storage and release, and combining the chemistry of NO release with enzymatic glucose sensing.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“New strategies for directing rather than avoiding the FBR by the active release of drugs and/or the body’s own signaling mediators of wound healing have created a unique path to alter the natural host response.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 6. Conclusions
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Carreau et al. reported reduced leukocyte adhesion at elevated NO concentrations, suggesting NO could reduce localization of inflammatory cells at the device-tissue interface.216”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [216] Carreau A., 2011, Exp. Cell Res. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The anti-inflammation correlated with the NO-release duration indicating that the observed benefits may only persist as long as the interface is releasing NO, in contrast to observations by Hetrick et al. where long-term reduction in inflammation were observed after cessation of NO release.103,238”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Collagen encapsulation was reduced at 3 and 6 weeks, and the greatest effect was observed for the largest payloads and longest release.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [240] Nichols S. P., 2012, Biomaterials source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Multiple reports indicate that NO serves as an angiogenic signaling model, up-regulating VEGF production and increasing blood vessel growth.213–214”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In addition to reduced collagen encapsulation (~20–25% vs. controls) observed at 3 and 6 weeks, the NO mitigated inflammation (determined by reduced inflammatory cells near the implant) and appeared to enhance vascular density at 1 and 3 weeks.238”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [238] Hetrick E. M., 2007, Biomaterials source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Traditional finger-prick glucose monitoring yields only instantaneous readings and cannot provide advance warning of hyperglycemic or hypoglycemic events.
“such monitoring only provides instantaneous blood glucose concentrations that are unable to warn of hyperglycemic or hypoglycemic events in advance.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Finger-prick sample collection is inconvenient and leads to poor patient compliance.
“Additionally, the sample collection (i.e., finger prick) method is inconvenient resulting in poor patient compliance.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
CGM systems estimate blood glucose by assuming interstitial fluid glucose is similar enough to blood glucose.
“CGM systems inherently estimate the blood glucose concentration by assuming the concentration of glucose in interstitial fluids will be similar enough.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The foreign body response is a major hurdle for continuous glucose monitoring performance.
“address the major hurdles related to the FBR.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The outer sensor membrane protects the enzyme.
“the outer sensor membrane that serves to protect the enzyme, tune response, and ultimately is responsible for the magnitude of the FBR”
The paper relies on this without support.
The outer sensor membrane tunes the sensor response.
“the outer sensor membrane that serves to protect the enzyme, tune response, and ultimately is responsible for the magnitude of the FBR”
The paper relies on this without support.
The outer sensor membrane determines the magnitude of the foreign body response.
“the outer sensor membrane that serves to protect the enzyme, tune response, and ultimately is responsible for the magnitude of the FBR”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The latter, generally requires 2-3 weeks stabilization period after surgery and are larger than the subcutaneous counterparts 88.”
From Glucose biosensors in clinical practice: principles, limits and perspectives of currently used devices (2022) · cites this paper as [88]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“This protocol allows transferring state information in small blocks of data at regular intervals, where the processor operates in a low power mode.107”
From Wearables in Medicine (2018) · cites this paper as [107]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“At the macro level (>100 μm in size), it is generally held that thicker materials produce a proportionally higher magnitude of foreign body responses and fibrosis3, 21.”
From Size- and shape-dependent foreign body immune response to materials implanted in rodents and non-human primates (2015) · cites this paper as [3]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
“Furthermore, studies evaluating the benefits of VEGF-, DX-, or VEGF/DX-release on the analytical performance of glucose biosensors have not been evaluated.”
§ Biocompatible Materials for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices > 5. Mitigating the foreign body response to improve analytical performance of in vivo glucose sensors > 5.6. Active release materials
“DX-releasing glucose biosensors retained >50% of their original sensitivity 2 weeks after implantation, the sensitivity of control membranes dropped to 15–42% of their original levels.187”
Citations
Cites
Exploring the full spectrum of macrophage activation
Mosser, D. M., & Edwards, J. P. (2008) · Nature Reviews Immunology · doi:10.1038/nri2448 · Cited by 9,144
Hydrogels for Tissue Engineering
Lee, K. Y., & Mooney, D. J. (2001) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr000108x · Cited by 5,295
Foreign body reaction to biomaterials
Anderson, J. M., Rodriguez, A., & Chang, D. T. (2008) · Seminars in Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.smim.2007.11.004 · Cited by 5,138
Electrospinning: A Fascinating Method for the Preparation of Ultrathin Fibers
Greiner, A., & Wendorff, J. H. (2007) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.200604646 · Cited by 4,260
ELECTRODE SYSTEMS FOR CONTINUOUS MONITORING IN CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY
Clark, L. C., & Lyons, C. (1962) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1962.tb13623.x · Cited by 3,945
Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor: Basic Science and Clinical Progress
Ferrara, N. (2004) · Endocrine Reviews · doi:10.1210/er.2003-0027 · Cited by 3,788
Regulation of Wound Healing by Growth Factors and Cytokines
WERNER, S., & GROSE, R. (2003) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.2003.83.3.835 · Cited by 3,629
Electrochemical Glucose Biosensors
Wang, J. (2008) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr068123a · Cited by 3,498
Antiinflammatory Action of Glucocorticoids — New Mechanisms for Old Drugs
Rhen, T., & Cidlowski, J. A. (2005) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra050541 · Cited by 3,149
On the mechanisms of biocompatibility
Williams, D. F. (2008) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.04.023 · Cited by 2,772
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- 2012, World Health Statistics 2012
- Wang J., 2008, Chem. Rev., 108, 814, 10.1021/cr068123a · DOI · Paper page
- Arnold M. A., 2010, In Vivo Glucose Sensing
- Vashist S. K., 2012, Anal. Chim. Acta, 750, 16, 10.1016/j.aca.2012.03.043 · DOI · Paper page
- 2012, Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) Systems - Global Pipeline Analysis, Competitive Landscape and Market Forecasts to 2017
- Henning T., 2010, In Vivo Glucose Sensing
- Myrer J. W., 1997, J. Athletic Training, 32, 238
- Wilson G. S., 2009, In Vivo Glucose Sensing
- Thomé-Duret V., 1996, Diabetes Metab., 22, 174
- Helton K. L., 2011, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol., 5, 647, 10.1177/193229681100500318 · DOI · Paper page
- Sharkawy A. A., 1998, J. Biomed. Mater. Res., 40, 598, 10.1002/(sici)1097-4636(19980615)40:4 · DOI
- Marshall A. J., 2004, ACS Polym. Prepr., 45, 100
- Ratner B. D., 2009, ACS Polym. Prepr., 50, 286
- Ward W. K., 2004, Diabetes Technol. Ther., 19, 155
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Device integration of electrochemical biosensors
Wu, J., Liu, H., Chen, W., Ma, B., & Ju, H. (2023) · Nature Reviews Bioengineering · doi:10.1038/s44222-023-00032-w · Cited by 995
Veiseh, O., Doloff, J. C., Ma, M., Vegas, A. J., Tam, H. H., Bader, A. R., Li, J., Langan, E., Wyckoff, J., Loo, W. S., et al. (2015) · Nature Materials · doi:10.1038/nmat4290 · Cited by 897
Electrochemical glucose sensors in diabetes management: an updated review (2010–2020)
Teymourian, H., Barfidokht, A., & Wang, J. (2020) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/d0cs00304b · Cited by 915
Design of biodegradable, implantable devices towards clinical translation
Li, C., Guo, C., Fitzpatrick, V., Ibrahim, A. G. A., Zwierstra, M. J., Hanna, P. C., Lechtig, A., Nazarian, A., Lin, S. J., & Kaplan, D. L. (2019) · Nature Reviews Materials · doi:10.1038/s41578-019-0150-z · Cited by 828
Yetisen, A. K., Martinez‐Hurtado, J. L., Ünal, B., Khademhosseini, A., & Butt, H. (2018) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.201706910 · Cited by 569
Metadata
- Authors
- Nichols, S. P., Koh, A., Storm, W. L., Shin, J. H., & Schoenfisch, M. H.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Kwangwoon University (KR)
- Corresponding author
- Schoenfisch, Mark H.
- Venue
- Chemical Reviews
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2013-02-07
- Volume
- 113
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 2528-2549
- ISSN
- 0009-2665 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-6890
- PMC
- PMC3624030
- OpenAlex
- W1993893772
- Semantic Scholar
- 15d86c3915bf4d8443f91beee6a62f80dcdc9ac4
- Cited by
- 347
- References
- 246
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 14
- FWCI
- 2.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Chemical Reviews (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (EB 000708, R01EB000708)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Surfaces, Coatings and Films › Polymer Surface Interaction Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Electrochemical sensors and biosensors
- Keywords
- biomaterials, continuous glucose monitoring, biomedical implants, diabetes mellitus, biocompatibility, glucose sensor, tissue response to implants, inflammation, diabetes complications, diabetes management, diabetes prevention
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Biocompatible Materials, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Disease Models, Animal, Humans, Polymers, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Biosensing Techniques, Porosity, Elastic Modulus, Electrochemical Techniques
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
