ReviewJournal of analytical methods in chemistry2014
Solid phase microextraction and related techniques for drugs in biological samples.
Review in Journal of analytical methods in chemistry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Volumetric Absorptive Microsampling in Toxicology.Toxics · 2024Review
- Article
- Application of Microextraction-Based Techniques for Screening-Controlled Drugs in Forensic Context-A Review.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Green Approaches to Sample Preparation Based on Extraction Techniques.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Development of a sensitive and accurate method for the simultaneous determination of selected insecticides and herbicide in tap water and wastewater samples using vortex-assisted switchable solvent-based liquid-phase microextraction prior to determination by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2020Article
- Comparative analysis of Rapid Equilibrium Dialysis (RED) and solid phase micro-extraction (SPME) methods for In Vitro-In Vivo extrapolation of environmental chemicals.Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA · 2019Article
- Molecularly Imprinted Polymers as Extracting Media for the Chromatographic Determination of Antibiotics in Milk.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Solid-phase microextraction technology forTrends in analytical chemistry : TRAC · 2016Article
- Development of a new method for sampling and monitoring oncology staff exposed to cyclophosphamide drug.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In drug discovery and development, the quantification of drugs in biological samples is an important task for the determination of the physiological performance of the investigated drugs. After sampling, the next step in the analytical process is sample preparation. Because of the low concentration levels of drug in plasma and the variety of the metabolites, the selected extraction technique should be virtually exhaustive. Recent developments of sample handling techniques are directed, from one side, toward automatization and online coupling of sample preparation units. The primary objective of this review is to present the recent developments in microextraction sample preparation methods for analysis of drugs in biological fluids. Microextraction techniques allow for less consumption of solvent, reagents, and packing materials, and small sample volumes can be used. In this review the use of solid phase microextraction (SPME), microextraction in packed sorbent (MEPS), and stir-bar sorbtive extraction (SBSE) in drug analysis will be discussed. In addition, the use of new sorbents such as monoliths and molecularly imprinted polymers will be presented.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.