ArticleApplied spectroscopy2020
Evaluating Low-Cost Optical Spectrometers for the Detection of Simulated Substandard and Falsified Medicines.
Article in Applied spectroscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of Different Measuring Backgrounds on the Classification of Multilayer Polyolefin Films Using a Near-Infrared Handheld Spectrometer.Applied spectroscopy · 2025Article
- Estimating the prevalence of poor-quality anti-TB medicines: a neglected risk for global TB control and resistance.BMJ global health · 2023Article
- Usefulness of medicine screening tools in the frame of pharmaceutical post-marketing surveillance.PloS one · 2023Article
- Portable NIR spectroscopy: the route to green analytical chemistry.Frontiers in chemistry · 2023Review
- Evaluation of portable devices for medicine quality screening: Lessons learnt, recommendations for implementation, and future priorities.PLoS medicine · 2021Article
- QCM Sensor Arrays, Electroanalytical Techniques and NIR Spectroscopy Coupled to Multivariate Analysis for Quality Assessment of Food Products, Raw Materials, Ingredients and Foodborne Pathogen Detection: Challenges and Breakthroughs.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Distribution of substandard and falsified (SF) medicines is on the rise, and its impact on public health, particularly in low-resource countries, is becoming increasingly significant. Portable, nondestructive screening devices can support regulatory authorities in their defense against the spread of SF medicines. Vibrational spectroscopy is an ideal candidate due to its sampling ease and speed. In this work, five portable, among which four are considered low-cost, spectroscopic devices based on near-infrared (NIR), Raman, and mid-infrared (MIR) were evaluated to quantify active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and formulation accuracy within simulated authentic, falsified, and substandard medicines. Binary sample mixtures containing a typical API in antimalarial, antiretroviral, or anti-tuberculosis medicines were assessed. In both univariate and multivariate analyses, the API quantification performance of the digital light processing (DLP) NIR spectrometer and a handheld Raman device consistently matched or exceeded that of the other NIR spectrometers and a scientific grade MIR spectrometer. In the formulation accuracy tests, data from all devices, other than the silicon photodiode array NIR spectrometer, were able to create regression models with less than 6% error. From this exploratory study, we conclude that certain portable NIR devices hold significant promise as cost-effective screening tools for falsified and potentially substandard medicines, and they warrant further investigation and development.
Indexed as
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.