Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28650151›Full record

ArticleAnalytical chemistry2017

Orthogonal Comparison of GC-MS and

Jingwei Cai, Jingtao Zhang, Yuan Tian, Limin Zhang, Emmanuel Hatzakis, Kristopher W Krausz, Philip B Smith, Frank J Gonzalez, Andrew D Patterson

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Analytical chemistry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Nutrients · 2024
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jingwei CaiCenter for Molecular Toxicology and Carcinogenesis, Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University , University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, United States.
Jingtao ZhangCenter for Molecular Toxicology and Carcinogenesis, Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University , University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, United States.
Yuan TianCenter for Molecular Toxicology and Carcinogenesis, Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University , University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, United States.
Limin ZhangCAS Key Laboratory of Magnetic Resonance in Biological Systems, State Key Laboratory of Magnetic Resonance and Atomic and Molecular Physics, National Centre for Magnetic Resonance in Wuhan, Wuhan Institute of Physics and Mathematics, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) , Wuhan 430071, China.
Emmanuel HatzakisDepartment of Food Science and Technology, The Ohio State University , Columbus, Ohio 43210, United States.
Kristopher W KrauszLaboratory of Metabolism, National Cancer Institute, NIH , Bethesda, Maryland 20892, United States.
Philip B SmithMetabolomics, Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University , University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, United States.
Frank J GonzalezLaboratory of Metabolism, National Cancer Institute, NIH , Bethesda, Maryland 20892, United States.
Andrew D PattersonCenter for Molecular Toxicology and Carcinogenesis, Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University , University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2073-0070
Pennsylvania State University · USNational Cancer Institute · USChinese Academy of Sciences · CNThe Ohio State University · US

Funding

Xenobiotic receptorsZIABC005562 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI GONZALEZ, FRANK J · 2009 to 2025
$26.9M
Xenobiotic ReceptorsZIABC005708 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI GONZALEZ, FRANK J · 2009 to 2025
$16.4M
Xenobiotic-Metabolizing EnzymesZ01BC005562 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI GONZALEZ, FRANK J · 1996 to 2008
$1.3M
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 BC005562
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Short chain fatty acids (SCFAs) are important regulators of host physiology and metabolism and may contribute to obesity and associated metabolic diseases. Interest in SCFAs has increased in part due to the recognized importance of how production of SCFAs by the microbiota may signal to the host. Therefore, reliable, reproducible, and affordable methods for SCFA profiling are required for accurate identification and quantitation. In the current study, four different methods for SCFA (acetic acid, propionic acid, and butyric acid) extraction and quantitation were compared using two independent platforms including gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and

Identifiers

PMID28650151
PMCPMC6334302
OpenAlexW2659815276

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.