Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28238110›Full record

ReviewLung2017

Electronic Nose Technology in Respiratory Diseases.

Silvano Dragonieri, Giorgio Pennazza, Pierluigi Carratu, Onofrio Resta

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Lung, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Volatilomes of human infection.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2024
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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.

Silvano DragonieriDepartment of Respiratory Diseases, University of Bari, Piazza Giulio Cesare 11, 70124, Bari, Italy. silvano.dragonieri@uniba.it.
Giorgio PennazzaUnit of Electronics for Sensor Systems, Center for Integrated Research, Campus Bio-Medico University, Rome, Italy.
Pierluigi CarratuDepartment of Respiratory Diseases, University of Bari, Piazza Giulio Cesare 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.
Onofrio RestaDepartment of Respiratory Diseases, University of Bari, Piazza Giulio Cesare 11, 70124, Bari, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electronic noses (e-noses) are based on arrays of different sensor types that respond to specific features of an odorant molecule, mostly volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Differently from gas chromatography and mass spectrometry, e-noses can distinguish VOCs spectrum by pattern recognition. E-nose technology has successfully been used in commercial applications, including military, environmental, and food industry. Human-exhaled breath contains a mixture of over 3000 VOCs, which offers the postulate that e-nose technology can have medical applications. Based on the above hypothesis, an increasing number of studies have shown that breath profiling by e-nose could play a role in the diagnosis and/or screening of various respiratory and systemic diseases. The aim of the present study was to review the principal literature on the application of e-nose technology in respiratory diseases.

Indexed as

Electronic NoseAsthmaBreath TestsHumansLung NeoplasmsMesotheliomaPleural NeoplasmsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveRespiratory Tract InfectionsSleep Apnea, ObstructiveVolatile Organic CompoundsVolatile Organic CompoundsElectronic noseExhaled breathVolatile organic compounds

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.