Next Article in Journal
Detection and Quantification of Tp53 and p53-Anti-p53 Autoantibody Immune Complex: Promising Biomarkers in Early Stage Lung Cancer Diagnosis
Next Article in Special Issue
3D Bioprinting of Multi-Material Decellularized Liver Matrix Hydrogel at Physiological Temperatures
Previous Article in Journal
A Novel Enzyme-Free Ratiometric Fluorescence Immunoassay Based on Silver Nanoparticles for the Detection of Dibutyl Phthalate from Environmental Waters
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Biosensors
Volume 12
Issue 2
10.3390/bios12020126
Review Report
biosensors-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Perspective
Peer-Review Record

Academic User View: Organ-on-a-Chip Technology

Biosensors 2022, 12(2), 126; https://doi.org/10.3390/bios12020126
by Mathias Busek 1,2,†, Aleksandra Aizenshtadt 1,†, Mikel Amirola-Martinez 1, Ludivine Delon 2 and Stefan Krauss 1,2,*
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Biosensors 2022, 12(2), 126; https://doi.org/10.3390/bios12020126
Submission received: 27 January 2022 / Revised: 11 February 2022 / Accepted: 15 February 2022 / Published: 16 February 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Microfluidics and Organ-on-a-Chip for Disease Modeling and Drug Screening)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper presents the survey of organ-on-a-chip users about their attitude and feeling of such devices and platforms. The paper provides novel information that is describing the development of the field. It is well written and the presentation is clear. 

The main issue of the paper is that in the survey very few people were using commercial (13%) and both commercial and custom (16%) types of devices. The most of the questioned people were using only custom devices. Therefore there is a contradiction - in the Table 1 there are mentioned 24 companies that produce OoC devices but very few questioned people are using them. Could you provide approximate market volume of the commercial devices to get the idea how many of them are currently being used?

Also there were few people from industry taking part in the survey (13%). Do you have representative sample of commercial systems users? What types of OoC devices use users from industry?

Overall, the paper might be accepted after answering these questions.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This work deserves publication as the presented information can be of great importance for the future development and valorisation of organ-on-a-chip models. To further strengthen this, I would ask the authors to include 2 additional types of information:

  • To indicate the geographical origin of the participants of the survey such that the reader can evaluate if there is a diffused spread among the participants.
  • To include a table in the supplementary material with the names of the institutes that participated in the survey. This will enable potential collaborations between the survey participants and the readers (who for example might have good fabrication facilities). Obviously, I am fully aware that the survey must be kept anonymous but a general listing of the institutes without notifying individual answers can already be of great help.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop