Table 1.
Performance comparison of different glucose sensing techniques.
| SERS probe materials | Linear range | LOD (Method of determination) | Storage time (days) | Storage condition | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ag@AuNPs modified GO | 2.0–6.0 mM | 1.0 mM | 30* | 4 °C | 62 |
| Chemical etching of silver nanoparticles | 0.01–20 mM. | 10 μM | — | — | 63 |
| Multi-branched gold nanostructures | 5–20 mM | 5 mM (IUPAC) | — | — | 64 |
| Gold nanoparticles onto 3-MBA/1-DT | 2–16 mM | 0.5 mM | — | — | 52 |
| Ag nanocubes | 0–250 mM | — | — | 65 | |
| Silver nanorod arrays | 0–20 mM | — | — | 66 | |
| silver coating Hollow agarose microneedle | 5–150 mM | — | — | 60 | |
| Pure Ag NP | 10−4–1 M | 10 μM (IUPAC) | 30 | Normal indoor condition† | This work |
| 0.7 μM (AOAC) | |||||
| Ag NP@N-GQD | 10−6–1 M | 0.10 μM (IUPAC) | 30 | Normal indoor condition† | This work |
| 0.022 μM (AOAC) |
LOD is the acronym of “Limit Of Detection”. The details about the methods of LOD determination are described in the section–“SERS based glucose detection” of the text. *Quantitative information about comparison in SERS performance before and after storage was not available in these reports, although the authors claimed that the SERS substrates worked well after the specified storage period. †Normal indoor condition refers to an average temperature of 25 °C and a relative humidity of 69%.