Next Article in Journal
A Novel LiDAR Data Classification Algorithm Combined CapsNet with ResNet
Previous Article in Journal
A Highly Sensitive and Selective ppb-Level Acetone Sensor Based on a Pt-Doped 3D Porous SnO2 Hierarchical Structure
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Reply

Reply to Comments: Comparison of Methods Study between a Photonic Crystal Biosensor and Certified ELISA to Measure Biomarkers of Iron Deficiency in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients

by
Ross D. Peterson
1,
Kenneth R. Wilund
2,3,
Brian T. Cunningham
4,5 and
Juan E. Andrade
1,3,*
1
Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
2
Department of Kinesiology and Community Health, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
3
Division of Nutritional Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
4
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
5
Department of Bioengineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2020, 20(4), 1149; https://doi.org/10.3390/s20041149
Submission received: 17 February 2020 / Accepted: 17 February 2020 / Published: 19 February 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Biosensors)
In this brief note, we respond to the comments made by Dr. N. Abbas, who raised a concern over the display of information in a graph presented in our article “Comparison of Methods Study between a Photonic Crystal Biosensor and Certified ELISA to Measure Biomarkers of Iron Deficiency in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients” (Peterson, et al. 2017, 17(10), 2203). We have carefully analyzed the arguments in the comment and have concluded that in effect there is an error in the display of the estimated error boundaries in Figure 2. These boundaries have been corrected and are shown in the new Figure 2 presented below. This was an error at the final stages of rendering this figure, in which the boundaries for the 0 ± 1σ(δ) and 0 ± 2σ(δ) were moved. This error in the display of boundaries does not change the discussion of findings or the conclusions.
Figure 2. Difference plots comparing serum ferritin and sTfR concentrations from hemodialysis patients using the PC biosensor against the certified ELISAs.
Figure 2. Difference plots comparing serum ferritin and sTfR concentrations from hemodialysis patients using the PC biosensor against the certified ELISAs.
Sensors 20 01149 g001

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Peterson, R.D.; Wilund, K.R.; Cunningham, B.T.; Andrade, J.E. Reply to Comments: Comparison of Methods Study between a Photonic Crystal Biosensor and Certified ELISA to Measure Biomarkers of Iron Deficiency in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients. Sensors 2020, 20, 1149. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20041149

AMA Style

Peterson RD, Wilund KR, Cunningham BT, Andrade JE. Reply to Comments: Comparison of Methods Study between a Photonic Crystal Biosensor and Certified ELISA to Measure Biomarkers of Iron Deficiency in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients. Sensors. 2020; 20(4):1149. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20041149

Chicago/Turabian Style

Peterson, Ross D., Kenneth R. Wilund, Brian T. Cunningham, and Juan E. Andrade. 2020. "Reply to Comments: Comparison of Methods Study between a Photonic Crystal Biosensor and Certified ELISA to Measure Biomarkers of Iron Deficiency in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients" Sensors 20, no. 4: 1149. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20041149

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop