ArticleJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry2015
Mass Spectrometry of Nanoparticles is Different.
Article in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Nanoparticle Analysis in Biomaterials Using Laser Ablation-Single Particle-Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry.Analytical chemistry · 2019Article
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
Secondary ion mass spectrometry, SIMS, is a method of choice for the characterization of nanoparticles, NPs. For NPs with large surface-to-volume ratios, heterogeneity is a concern. Assays should thus be on individual nano-objects rather than an ensemble of NPs; however, this may be difficult or impossible. This limitation can be side-stepped by probing a large number of dispersed NPs one-by-one and recording the emission from each NP separately. A large collection of NPs will likely contain subsets of like-NPs. The experimental approach is to disperse the NPs and hit an individual NP with a single massive cluster (e.g., C-60, Au-400). At impact energies of ~1 keV/atom, they generate notable secondary ion (SI) emission. Examination of small NPs (≤20 nm in diameter) shows that the SI emission is size-dependent and impacts are not all equivalent. Accurate identification of the type of impact is key for qualitative assays of core or outer shell composition. For quantitative assays, the concept of effective impacts is introduced. Selection of co-emitted ejecta combined with rejection (anticoincidence) of substrate ions allows refining chemical information within the projectile interaction volume. Last, to maximize the SI signal, small NPs (≤5 nm in diameter) can be examined in the transmission mode where the SI yields are enhanced ~10-fold over those in the (conventional) reflection direction. Future endeavors should focus on schemes acquiring SIs, electrons, and photons concurrently.
Identifiers
25944367What 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.