Smooth Like Cocoa Butter

Hey readers!

This week, we turned in our methods proposals for IRB approval to the sweet smell of cocoa butter (If you don't smell like success, how can you be successful??).

This blog is, in fact, special cloth talk.

I was able to write out the research design for my experiment, which is a mixed (quantitative and qualitative elements), prospective study. As I wrote about controls, confounding variables, and ethical precautions, I felt like a real researcher (which is, I guess, the point of this class). It's pretty cool stuff!

Wish me luck for getting approval!

Now, I have a plan for how to conduct my research, and by next week, I will even have my methods section done. I'm on top of the world!

I am Roy Williams.

But, wait. The hard part is coming up soon -- implementing the research. You know what they say: don't count your data before they hatch!

Congratulations... you played yourself.

Since I am employing mixed methods for a lot of sample combinations, I am going to start data collection in the lab before the 3rd trimester, so I'll start on December 26th (Happy Holidays?). Since I have to finish obtaining results by the middle of February, I will finish by February 20th. After that, I will need to finish analyzing my results and write up the results/discussion section and the conclusion. After all, final presentations are May 17th!

As DJ Khaled would say, "they" don't want us to plan our implementation out, so we got to plan our implementation out!

Here's my detailed plan for implementing my methods:

Week	Tasks
1 (Dec 26 - Jan 1)	prepare substrates and coatings (all compositions and dilutions),  apply coatings to samples to make 12 pairs of identical samples (1a - 12b),  label the samples and create master spreadsheet,  obtain consent from participant (and his parents),  preparing 3LCAA apparatus
2 (Jan 2 - Jan 8)	perform 3LCAA on samples 1a - 12a,  finish data analysis of 1a - 6a for 3LCAA images using Inkscape
3 (Jan 9 - Jan 15)	finish data analysis for 7a - 12a for 3LCAA images using Inkscape,  extract blood and apply it to samples 1b - 3b,  perform RBS on samples 1b -3b,  finish code sheets for samples 1b-3b
4 (Jan 16 - Jan 22)	input final surface energy values into the master spreadsheet,  analyze RBS results for 1b -3b,  extract blood and apply it to samples 4b - 6b,  perform RBS on 4b - 6b,  finish code sheets for 4b -6b
5 (Jan 23 - Jan 29)	analyze RBS results for 4b -6b,  extract blood and apply it to samples 7b - 9b,   perform RBS on 7b - 9b,  finish code sheets for 7b -9b
6 (Jan 30 - Feb 5)	analyze RBS results for 7b -9b,  extract blood and apply it to samples 10b - 12b,   perform RBS on 10b - 12b,  finish code sheets for 10b -12b
7 (Feb 6 - Feb 12)	analyze RBS results for 10b -12b,  compile quantitative measurements of uniformity for each sample,  review qualitative coding sheets to establish gradation and create the scale
8 (Feb 13 - Feb 19)	TBD -- room in implementation for unforeseen delays or obstacles.  or I finish implementation 1 week earlier, and can start writing up my results.

My implementation will be very iterative, since I want to treat all my samples identically. One benefit of this approach is that if I am ever running behind, I can make up time by simply spending more time in the lab to run more samples. The analysis of my data will involve finding the average difference in composition for elements like C, N, O, Ca, K, and Fe for 2 different spots on a sample (using absolute value of course to prevent cancelations). This will be the quantitative measure of uniformity. I will put this in a table with sample type, surface energy, and the quantitative measure of uniformity shown. Additionally, the qualitative data will rank each sample relatively compared to other samples in terms of cracking, cratering, phase separation, and moisture. The combination of quantitative and qualitative will let me characterize each sample. Additionally, example RBS spectra can be shown for individual samples in order to demonstrate that elemental composition can be found with HemaDrop analysis.

In mid-February, I will start writing up my results and discussion. In this way, I can have a final draft of my results by March 4 and edit tirelessly for a final research paper by March 20. By the end of April, I can have a polished presentation!

Sorry for the slightly late post...

Let's secure the bag this week in research, and keep wearing that cocoa butter, so everything goes smooth!

Cheers,

YP

(772)

Elevating the Elevator Pitch

Hey readers!

This week, I worked on my Methods Proposal. For my blog post, we were given the task of making an elevator pitch!

Here is the video from YouTube. Hope you enjoy!

Let's have another great week of research!

Cheers,

YP

The Methods to My Madness

Hey readers!

It's been a productive few days -- here's what I've been up to! This past week, I've been working on my Methods Assignment, where we were given the task of honing in on the methods of 4 (I did 5) sources, examining their methods, and applying their findings to my initial idea of my methods. Since I turned it in yesterday, here's what some exciting new information I found.

Dab, Squidward...Dab!

Although going into this project, I definitely knew I'd need a quantitative method to perform tests to optimize the HemaDrop preparation method to create uniform thin solid films of blood. I was like Squidward in this parade: I knew what I wanted to do (dab, aka develop a solid experimental design), but I need some instigation.

Nonetheless, studying the methods of others allowed me to determine specifically the type of experimental procedure I want to conduct. Additionally, sources, like Acharya et al and Dar et al, emphasized the importance of using controls in experimental studies. In this way, I can prove causation from the results from using hyper-hydrophilic films by manipulating variables in a controlled manner.

Triggered...

Additionally, the important aspect of all procedures was the emphasis on consistent, reproducible sample preparation. For this, I definitely need to establish a clear protocol for sample preparation. Another aspect I realized about my methods was that to check sample variability, more participants should be used than just me. In this way, I can greatly increase the validity of my study. To get these participants, I will need to adapt our current IRB approval and consent forms to apply directly to my project. I feel good about this, as I was part of the IRB approval process at ASU, so I have some level of experience. The laboratories we work at are already Biosafety Level 2, which is required for obtaining human blood samples. In this way, my research will also be ethical. I will most likely use fellow interns as participants (convenience sampling), as they will be willing to be pricked (even though it's painless) and at the lab anyways.

That's me crossing over my methods section and nailing the 3-pointer.

An unexpected part of my methods that I uncovered with the methods assignment was that I definitely want to incorporate qualitative observations into my methods. As seen in Acharya's thesis, specific criteria like phase separation, cracking, cratering, and lack of uniformity can be used to classify samples and explain quantitative results. This will really give my research a holistic perspective that would otherwise be lacking.

I also realized that our procedure for capillary sampling can be much more streamlined. Although we did use the correct grade lancet for pricking finger tips, specific procedures, like those outlined in Fan et al, which employ rubefacients (dilate the capillaries) and capillary tubes, increase the validity of the results, as those are the standard of care for obtaining microliters of blood from patients.

Capillary sampling in action!

By following a more standardized procedure, our results can be more standardized and replicable.

Now... what am I worried about?? 

Rip...

A major concern that I have with my research right now is making sure I have enough time to collect data and perform all my experiments within a few weeks. I'm trying to fix this by planning out a clear schedule with Dr. Herbots and getting ahead on testing by starting in January (probably). By next week, I should have a clear picture of my research plan and get a headstart on my proposal!

Well, in the meantime, let's keep loving blood and doing some fun research!

Cheers,
Yash

(604)

Started from the Bottom, Now I'm Here...

Hey readers!

Wow, it's been way too long... more than a month! Since I last posted, so many things have changed (good and bad) -- my literature review has been finished, I submitted some college applications, the weather is nice now, and Donald Trump was elected president. Other things haven't -- the Cardinals suck, the mini-dab is still fashionable, and Ashwath's memes are dank as ever.

Before I get into the meat of my post, I'm super excited to announce that at the 2016 American Physical Society Fall Meeting at New Mexico State University, I presented the research we've done so far on HemaDrop™ and got an award for best undergraduate presentation. Here's the link to a video of my presentation! The reason I'm talking about this experience on my blog -- apart from trying to maximize the views on that video -- is that I think that AP Research, Mrs. Haag and Dr. Herbots's help, the comments from you guys, and my literature review allowed me to understand and articulate information about my project in a way I never could before. So, thanks for that!

That's me getting the certificate and cash from Dr. Zaniewski!

Now, I'm going to talk about how far I've come, where I'm at, and what I have to do. First off, I think I've come a long way from the beginning of the year. Even though it may seem like I had an idea and project from the get-go, I have grown to embrace what I originally feared -- the actual mechanisms of creating a hyper-hydrophilic film. Before, the complexities of surface-energy coatings and substrate smoothness made me a nervous, but since that was where my research gap is, now I am all about those 2 topics. Additionally, I learned much more about the implications of my research and the importance of microliter blood analysis. Although I knew vaguely about anemia, I never understood the nuances of hospital-acquired anemia that I found through the conversation between sources like Thakkar et al, van der Bom et al, and Salisbury et al. Moreover, explaining my project to Mrs. Haag and writing it all out helped me think about HemaDrop in a completely different way, with greater connections between disparate parts like blood properties, hyper-hydrophilic films, and blood testing.

Right now, I've finished my literature review and started embarking on figuring out my methods. My job for the next trimester is to figure out how I want to answer my question and conduct my experiments. Although I know my methods will be quantitative, there are some qualitative aspects for describing samples, which I definitely want to have as part of my results. Additionally, I need to see how studies in the past have conducted testing with many different types of samples and analysis methods efficiently (trying all combinations in the best way to maximize information). Finally, I need to examine different analysis techniques (e.g., atomic force microscopy, three-liquid contact angle analysis, terahertz spectroscopy, RBS, and PIXE) and justify which ones are best to use for the data I want to collect.

Here's to more fun times in AP Research!

Cheers,
YP

(494)

A (Face)Palmer: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Hey readers!

I am writing this blog post immediately after watching the Cardinals lose to the LA Rams and drop to 1-3. My dad and I have resolved to stop watching games for the rest of the season... at least I'll have more time for AP Research! Unfortunately, this devastating loss was not the most embarrassing experience of my weekend.

On Friday afternoon, during a conference call with my research group, I was sharing my screen on Google Hangouts to explain how to analyze RBS spectra and create a compelling poster when the unexpected happened. As I readied myself to explain my insightful point about the data, my eyes widened with fear. A circle, greener than chloroplasts, with 3 curved lines resembling the convoluted endoplasmic reticulum of the endomembrane system (I honestly can't explain my desire to use cellular biology imagery right now) bounced up and down at the bottom of my screen.

A new black window covered up the picturesque poster I was displaying. My entire life flashed through my eyes as I realized the magnitude of what had just occurred. An accidental mouse-click had opened the beloved Spotify application, displaying to all viewers the infamous Hype/Ball playlist and the last song I was listening to by my favorite artist of the PRESENT (you all know who that is...): "I Got the Keys" by DJ Khaled, Jay Z, and (the one-and-only) Future. Stifled laughter from fellow interns echoed through speakers of my MacBook Pro, and I received 3 separate texts, 2 different Snapchats, and 1 Facebook message asking me if I knew I was still screen-sharing. I minimized the window quickly, and with it, my dignity.

I pressed the wrong KEY KEY KEY.

Now that we've all been triggered thoroughly, I'm going to talk about the good, the neutral (not bad?), and the ugly about my research project.

No caption needed -- too good.

• The Good: I am very confident about the grasp I have of the motivations and mechanisms behind HemaDrop™. Compiling sources, writing, and presenting about my research has really allowed me to understand why this research matters, how HemaDrop works, and what methods we can use to analyze its viability. Additionally, I am very happy with the current research question I wrote on Friday (What properties of high surface-energy coatings and surface topography allow HemaDrop™ to optimize uniformity and analyzability of solid films created by congealing microliters of blood on substrates?) and new way of looking at this research I worked on with Mrs. Haag and Dr. Herbots recently. I had unknowingly developed a set frame of mind that was stifling my ability to describe our research from the beginning and to a general audience. I am also thrilled with the potential methods I get to plan and undertake for my primary research, as I am so curious to see how HemaDrop™ samples respond to various analysis techniques and with different substrate properties. Finally, I am excited with the extensive support system I have through AP Research and the Herbots research group. As long as I stay on track and ahead of schedule, I will be able to reach out for help on any aspect giving me difficulty.

 

Jay Z: Cold and emotionless -- neutral.

• The Neutral: I have no strong feelings about my time management this year so far, since I have been trying to stay ahead of schedule, and I have been pretty solid in that regard. This is an area I can definitely improve on though. Additionally, I am neutral about writing the literature review, since I am a little nervous about constructing it in a compelling way, but I am also really excited to get writing, since it will allow me to show my understanding of my research so far. I guess those balance out into neutral.

I couldn't find a better GIF for the ugly, so here's DJ Khaled for the sake of symmetry

• The Ugly: I am slightly concerned about the number of possible combinations required to test in order to optimize HemaDrop and analysis techniques. Even though I am trying to pick and choose the analysis techniques based on sources in my literature review (describing limitations and advantages of different techniques), I am a little terrified about having to test all of these combinations and analyze the results. However, I think my question leaves some room for the potential result that I can't find the exact optimal conditions, since I am investigating the new field and I can't find all the answers. Also, I think studying and planning my methods carefully will also help this process.

I hope you enjoyed this more light-hearted post than the last few weeks, since I definitely enjoyed writing it! And that's the KEY after all.

Here's to moving on to FUTURE fun and research...

Cheers,
Yash

(803)

Questioning the Research Question: A Collapsing House of Cards

Hey readers!

After some extensive meetings with Mrs. Haag last week (thank you so much, Mrs. Haag), I figured out how to organize my literature review in a logical and cohesive order compared to my previous blogpost. I came into this class with a set way of thinking about my research from my previous work, which was governing how I wrote my outline. I was having difficulty considering how someone new to the research needed the information presented to understand it.

RIP Bird Gang

Much like the Cardinals this past week, I felt like I had so many chances to win -- to make a great outline -- but I fell short. I threw an interception in the red zone (I'm looking directly at you, Carson Palmer). I couldn't pick up a forced fumble and ended up kicking it out of bounds (Ehem, Tyrann Mathieu). At least I didn't have any fans to disappoint (Wait, but are you, my blog readers, the fans in this complex and extraneous metaphor? In that case, I'm sorry!). Now, the focus moves on to redemption -- the LA Rams and an official literature review outline due 10/7.

In the meantime, I am forming my preliminary research question based on the information I have compiled and the gaps in the research I have found. Here's what I envision for my research question: "To what extent is HemaDrop™ a viable method for determining blood composition by making a uniform, solid, and analyzable film from microliters of blood?"

Here why I decided on this question:

1. Scope: The scope of my research has been quite narrow from the beginning, as I am working  on a specific technology (HemaDrop™). Additionally, this research doesn't start out with the aim to create the perfect formulation of HemaDrop. Instead, the goal is to assess the efficacy of the technology in its current form and provide potential improvements based on the conversation between the literature and the results of the feasibility experiments. In this way, the final product of my research will not be judged exactly on if I create a successful product for microliter blood analysis, as much more will be required than the scope of an AP Research project. 
2. Key Terms:
• HemaDrop™: method for solid-based microliter blood analysis 
• Viable: Provide necessary quantitative information about blood composition including elemental and molecular composition, as a flexible method for creating samples for different techniques. 
• Uniform: different spots on the sample should not yield different compositions. 
• Solid: Only solid films are analyzable in vacuum, which is what most techniques require 
3. Variables: For my experiments, I am testing the viability of the analysis based on the quantitative results. This is the response variable. In my research, the explanatory variable are the properties of the substrate (composition, coating, etc) and the analysis technique. Based on the substrate properties, once the composition of the blood or saline solution is determined, the composition values of they are known could be used to compute the accuracy of the measurements, along with the error. 
4. Research-ability: I had some researchability concerns about the amount of analysis techniques I would have to look into, since I envision my methods creating a bunch of samples prepared in different ways (e.g., type of coating, substrate, etc.). There would be far too many combinations to test. For this reason, after talking to Dr. Herbots (my mentor), I will test 3, or a maximum of 4, analysis techniques (the best ones I determine based on the literature review). I have several sources which describe the advantages and limitations of the analysis techniques. By limiting the number of analysis techniques I will examine, I can make sure that the experiments I conduct are not too many, but also capture the full complexity of the research to come to an insightful conclusion. I see myself answering the question by comparing the results (accuracy, precision, etc) of using analysis techniques on various samples with canine blood, saline, and human blood. The comparison of these techniques will demonstrate how viable HemaDrop substrates are for making a uniform film of blood that can be analyzed by a variety of techniques.
5. Gap: There has been no successful implementation of microliter blood analysis thus far. Theranos has attempted liquid microliter blood analysis, but failed. The limitations of milliliter blood analysis create a clear need for microliter blood analysis, so a clear gap exists in the biomedical industry and in the care for patients. This research aims to fill this void and successfully perform microliter blood analysis. By applying concepts like superhydrophilicity and vacuum-based analysis techniques, HemaDrop aims to create a uniform analyzable film of blood from drops.
6. Significance: The signficance of this research is the creation of microliter blood analysis. The reduced volumes of blood is reduced discomfort in patients who undergo blood testing. Additionally, the problem of hospital-acquired anemia will also be mitigated in critically ill patients. By using less blood, doctors also can test patients more often to assess their diagnosis and monitor their conditions. Finally, the cost of microliter blood analysis will be less than milliliter blood analysis. 

Let's get back to the NFC Championship Game and back to rolling with research!

Cheers,

YP

(863)

The Outline of a Lit Review

Hey readers!

Now that I have compiled about 15 sources about HemaDrop, it's time to start actually outlining my literature review -- it's all business. In case you forgot, I have been using the following subtopics to classify my sources: (1) Blood diagnostics, (2) Superhydrophilic films, (3) Blood Properties, (4) Substrates, (5) Analysis Techniques, and (6) Key Illnesses/Conditions.

Here's what I envision for my literature review:

Subtopic 1: Blood Diagnostics

I have to discuss blood diagnostics in general to introduce the general field of research I am investigating and describe its importance before talking about mechanisms behind blood analysis. Additionally, by explaining the current technology used for blood testing, I can highlight its evolution, needs, and limitations -- basically the gap.

• Premise 1: Blood testing is crucial for diagnosing illnesses, monitoring the conditions of patients, and providing healthcare to patients.
• Barthels, et al: Blood testing is the cornerstone of medicine, as it has allowed for diagnosing of many conditions based on markers in the blood.
• UK National Health Service Database of Illnesses and Blood Markers: E.g., conditions like diabetes, anemia, cancers, heart attacks, etc. all alter blood composition in a specific way, including increased glucose content, lack of Fe, presence of specific biomarkers, elevated troponin concentrations.
• Premise 2: Current blood tests require 7 mL of blood on average.
• Barthels, et al & Hamerling
• Examples include high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), spectroscopy of liquid vials of blood, testing conductivity of blood for hematocrit levels, etc.
• Premise 3: The current volume of blood required for testing (7 mL) causes patients discomfort, complications including hospital-acquired anemia (HAA), and can limit the number of tests possible for ill patients (thereby preventing diagnoses too).
• Bom, et al: Better testing procedures and advancements in diagnostics is necessary to stop HAA and unnecessary costs on the healthcare system.
• Thakkar, et al: Current blood diagnostic testing causes HAA, incurs unnecessary cost on the healthcare system, and reduces the quality of patient care. 
• Premise 1 + Premise 2 + Premise 3 --> Conclusion 1: A need exists for blood diagnostic technology that uses smaller volumes of blood to improve patient care, prevent HAA in critically ill patients, and reduce costs.
• Premise 4: Due to the importance of blood analysis, need for standardization, and ease of use needed for doctors and nurses, blood analysis techniques must: "use whole blood and a small sample volume, provide results in less than 1-15 min, maintain high accuracy (at least at current levels), have simple operation and inbuilt quality control, require minimal maintenance,  and use an IT interface."
• Barthels, et al: Point-of-care testing with glucose monitors and similar devices that can provide real-time and accurate monitoring of conditions are part of the next generation of medical devices.
• Premise 5: Previous attempts at blood analysis with smaller volumes (e.g., Theranos) have been unsuccessful.
• Kidd, et al: Theranos had errors of over 10%, the standard for biomedical testing
• Potentially could find more examples?
• Conclusion 1 + Premise 4 + Premise 5 --> Conclusion 2: If implemented, small volume blood analysis (microliter) must meet the aforementioned criteria.
• Premise 6: Both solid and liquid types of blood analysis exist, with liquid requiring little processing and potential lack of uniformity, but with solid allowing for vacuum-based analysis techniques and use of smaller volumes.
• Pershad, et al
• UK National Health Service Database of Illnesses and Blood Markers
• Conclusion 2 + Premise 6 --> Conclusion 3: Potentially a solid-based blood analysis technique, if it overcomes issues with processing time and uniformity, could use small volumes of blood for analysis with vacuum-based techniques.

Subtopic 2: Superhydrophilic Films

The mechanism behind the uniform, thin, solid film that HemaDrop creates is superhydrophilic films (or hyper-hydrophilic if you wish). The explanation of this technology follows naturally after the potential of solid-based blood diagnostics is introduced, since this property is what makes HemaDrop create a uniform film. 

• Premise 7: Superhydrophilic films are created by applying superhydrophilic coatings on surfaces to make them attract water.
• Wen, et al: Superhydrophilicity characterized by high contact angle and high CA hysteresis change by sliding angle -- SHFs can be created by high surface energy coatings and reducing surface roughness (relates to substrates) 
• Hosokawa, et al: "Extremely high receptivity to water adhesion" 

• Premise 8: Superhydrophilic films, because of the importance of polarity have a wide range of biomedical applications
• Hosokawa, et al
• Drelich, et al:
• "For example, surfaces of hydrophilic materials were roughened in the past to improve adhesion in composites, biocompatibility in implant devices, or simply to enhance spreading of liquid, even so these activities were not linked yet to superhydrophilicity" 
• Premise 9: The wettability/hydroaffinity of the surface on which a blood drop affects its uniformity and phase separation.
• Need more support for this -- maybe look at chromatography methods which use a polar mobile phase. (Note: I didn't think of this claim earlier, so good thing I'm outlining!)
• Subpremise 3.1: Since some elements of blood (e.g., the lipid cholesterol) are non-polar, phase separation will occur on hydrophilic samples between non-polar and polar elements.
• Premise 7 + Premise 8 + Premise 9 + Conclusion 3 --> Conclusion 4: The hydroaffinity of a surface can be manipulated to make it superhydrophilic before a small drop of blood is applied. The surface's properties (e.g., surface energy from hydrophilicity) will affect how the blood dries, potentially making the film uniform and analyzable (combatting a major problem with solid analysis of blood)
• Potential Gap -- Determining the optimal degree of wettability to minimize phase separation and heterogeneity, maximize analyzability

Subtopic 3: Blood Properties

Now that we have looked at the coating, we have to investigate the properties of what is actually drying on the surface. Specifically, properties of blood which prevent uniform drying and solid state analysis should be investigated, as they could affect accuracy of measurements or even prevent them.

• Premise 10: Blood contains cells of varying types (e.g., RBCs, WBCs, etc.) that all separate by hydroaffinity and density.
• Palta, et al.
• Can stay unrefrigerated for 24 hrs without separating.
• Premise 11: Blood coagulates in vitro very differently than in vivo, as it uses a cascade of proteins including thrombin, fibrinogen, and protein S, which are activated by Ca ions.
• Acharya, et al.
• Premise 12: Superhydrophilic films limit the aforementioned effects on the blood while preparing a HemaDrop sample.
• Hosokawa, et al & Pershad, et al.
• Premise 10 + Premise 11 + Premise 12 --> Conclusion 5: SHFs can control the natural tendencies of blood to coagulate and separate on surfaces.

Subtopic 4: Substrates

Substrates, although they end up being coated, are extremely important, as many analysis techniques (including Rutherford Backscattering Spectrometry) are affected by conductivity of the sample. Additionally, for commercialization, cost and ease of use are necessary considerations when preparing a sample for analysis. Thus, the, cost, conductivity, and other properties of the sample must be compared to determine the optimal sample type.

• Premise 13 (branching off Premise 7): The hydroaffinity of a surface is affected by the surface topography (roughness). not just the coating, so the substrate affects the degree of superhydrophilicity we are able to achieve.
• Wen, et al.
• Hosokawa, et al.
• Premise 14: Tests have been conducted on TiN/Si(100) and Si(100) surfaces using canine blood with and without the superhydrophilic coatings.
• Pershad, et al: Results published demonstrated a clear difference and affect of the SHF, but the substrates were expensive to use due to their lack of major topographical features (they were smooth)
• Premise 13 + Premise 14 --> Conclusion 6: A more cost-effective alternative, including microscope slides (e.g., borosilicate), should be investigated and the resulting hydroaffinity should be compared after treatment with SHF.
• Potential Gap -- The effectiveness of these more rough surfaces should be tested as an alternative to smoother wafers as tested in Pershad, et al.

Subtopic 5: Analysis Technniques

After looking at the sample preparation mechanisms, it is natural to look into how the samples should be analyzed. A comparison of the limitations, strengths, and properties of various microscopies and spectroscopies will be undertaken to determine which ones to investigate with HemaDrop during experimentation.

• Premise 15: Solid blood samples that are prepared uniformly on substrates can be analyzed in a vacuum, allowing for many applicable microscopies and spectroscopies.
• Mukhopadhay, et al: Describes the conditions necessary for analyzing samples in vacuum
• Premise 16: Atomic Force Microscopy, Scanning/Tunneling Microscopy, IR Fourier Transform Spectroscopy, Ruthterford Backscattering Spectrometry, Particle-Induced X-Ray Emission, X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy, etc. are possible analysis techniques.
• Here's where I realize I need more sources to compare them -- I was having trouble finding good sources that have comparable information about all of them.
• Gap -- which techniques to consider? -- no conclusion yet.

Subtopic 6: Key Illnesses & Conditions

Finally, I want to investigate the specific markers in the blood of several illnesses and potentially simulate the disease in samples to determine whether the difference would be detected. To do this, I found a large database from the UK National Health Service. There are over 1000 illnesses, so to finish off I need to select which illnesses I want to specifically. I don't really have premises here, as I have just looked at diabetes, anemia, various types of cancer, and the monitoring of specific antibiotic concentrations as specific paths to test. I need to find studies who investigated diseases in a similar way that I am, perhaps after they found a new method of analysis.

My research question will then be something along these lines: "Can HemaDrop successfully create a uniform, solid, thin film and accurately analyze blood composition from microliters of blood?” Due to issues with IP, I can look into testing HemaDrop's viability rather than developing the product itself.

Well, I started writing and got very into it. So, there it is. Also, I apologize for no humor. I got too focused on content. Hopefully, I can start attacking the question parts I have outlined. I think if I can fill in those gaps, I'll have a solid understanding of what's going on in my field of study.

Cheers,

YP

(1, 598 -- RIP word limit)