Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25944367›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry2015

Mass Spectrometry of Nanoparticles is Different.

C-K Liang, M J Eller, S V Verkhoturov, Emile A Schweikert

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

C-K LiangDepartment of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, 77843, USA.
M J Eller
S V Verkhoturov
Emile A Schweikert

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.