How normalisation factors influence the interpretations of 3D-printed sensors for electroanalysis
How normalisation factors influence the interpretations of 3D-printed sensors for electroanalysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jelechem.2020.114937
复制
发表时间：
2021-01-15
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Patel, Bhavik Anil
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Abdalla, Aya;Perez, Fernando;Patel, Bhavik Anil
通过3D打印技术生产用于传感应用的电极的能力具有巨大的潜力。这主要是由于任何所需几何形状的电极的大规模生产。然而，比较不同的3D打印碳电极的电分析性能可能具有挑战性，因为每种导电打印材料都存在显著差异。本研究调查了可用于比较不同3D打印电极的不同标准化。我们比较了3D打印的炭黑和石墨烯电极用于监测三种重要的生物分析物（多巴胺，抗坏血酸和过氧化氢）。这些3D打印电极具有不同的导电负载和表面轮廓，因此我们使用了八种不同的方法来归一化电流响应。没有完美的标准化技术，因此使用方法的组合来调查性能最好的电极将是更好的方法。本研究展示了不同的可能的归一化方法，并强调了这些方法对电分析测量电极解释的影响。
The ability to produce electrodes through 3D-printing techniques for use in sensing applications has significant potential. This is mainly due to the mass production of electrodes at any desired geometry. However, comparing different 3D-printed carbon electrodes for electroanalytical performance can be challenging due to the significant variation in each conductive printed material. This study investigates different normalisations that could be applied to compare between different 3D-printed electrodes. We compared 3D-printed carbon black and graphene electrodes for the monitoring of three important biological analytes (dopamine, ascorbic acid and hydrogen peroxide). These 3D-printed electrodes have different conductive loads and surface profiles, and therefore we utilised eight different approaches for normalising the current response. There was no perfect normalisation technique and therefore using a combination of approaches to survey the best performing electrode would be a better approach. This study showcases the different possible normalisation methods and highlights the impact these can have on the interpretation of electrodes for electroanalytical measurement.