Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 327

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Conceptual and methodological issues relevant to cytokine and inflammatory marker measurements in clinical research

Open access
Zhou, Xin, Fragala, Maren S, McElhaney, Janet E, Kuchel, George A·2010·Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide clinical investigators with an understanding of factors to consider when wishing to add cytokine and inflammatory marker measurements to their studies. RECENT FINDINGS: Inflammation involves complex and coordinated responses of the immune system to tissue damage. In the absence of tools to routinely assess inflammation within living tissues, measurements of humoral factors such as cytokines and other inflammatory mediators or markers can provide predictive clinical information and insights into disease mechanisms. Historically, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) became the gold standard, yet this approach of measuring a single protein in each sample limits the amount of information which can be obtained from limited amounts of human sample. In recent years, commercially available multiplex technologies which detect large numbers of proteins in a limited volume have provided investigators with opportunities to begin addressing the complexity of inflammatory responses. Nevertheless, great attention needs to be paid to many aspects of study design, sample collection, sample measurement and data analysis. These considerations are especially significant when using technologies for which experience remains limited. SUMMARY: Whereas measurements of peripheral levels of inflammatory markers can add important mechanistic elements to human subject research, careful attention to conceptual and methodological considerations is essential, especially when using novel technologies.

Overview

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

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

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/mco.0b013e32833cf3bc

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

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

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

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 49 references

Cited by

See all 327

Metadata

Authors
Zhou, X., Fragala, M. S., McElhaney, J. E., & Kuchel, G. A.
Venue
Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care
Published
2010-09
Volume
13
Issue
5
Pages
541-547
ISSN
1363-1950 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2011136641
Cited by
327
References
49
FWCI
3.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

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

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

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

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

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

How to cite

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

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Conceptual and methodological issues relevant to cytokine and inflammatory marker measurements in clinical research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/mco.0b013e32833cf3bc
The paper
Zhou, X., Fragala, M. S., McElhaney, J. E., & Kuchel, G. A. (2010). Conceptual and methodological issues relevant to cytokine and inflammatory marker measurements in clinical research. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care. https://doi.org/10.1097/mco.0b013e32833cf3bc

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

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

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