Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33283439›Full record

ReviewAngewandte Chemie (International ed. in English)2021

Criegee Intermediates Beyond Ozonolysis: Synthetic and Mechanistic Insights.

Zahid Hassan, Mareen Stahlberger, Nicolai Rosenbaum, Stefan Bräse

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Reactions and Products of Squalene and Ozone: A Review.Environmental science & technology · 2022
    Review
  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.

Zahid HassanInstitute of Organic Chemistry, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Fritz-Haber-Weg 6, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5011-9905
Mareen StahlbergerInstitute of Organic Chemistry, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Fritz-Haber-Weg 6, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2150-9634
Nicolai RosenbaumInstitute of Organic Chemistry, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Fritz-Haber-Weg 6, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6959-6557
Stefan BräseInstitute of Organic Chemistry, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Fritz-Haber-Weg 6, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4845-3191

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

After more than 70 years since their discovery, Criegee intermediates (CIs) are back at the forefront of modern chemistry of short-lived reactive intermediates. They play an important role in the mechanistic context of chemical synthesis, total synthesis, pharmaceuticals, and, most importantly, climate-controlling aerosol formation as well as atmospheric chemistry. This Minireview summarizes key aspects of CIs (from the mechanism of formation, for example, by ozonolysis of alkenes and photolysis methods employing diiodo and diazo compounds, to their electronic structures and chemical reactivity), highlights the most recent findings and some landmark results of gas-phase kinetics, and detection/measurements. The recent progress in synthetic and mechanistic studies in the chemistry of CIs provides a guide to illustrate the possibilities for further investigations in this exciting field.

Indexed as

1,3-dipolar cycloadditionsatmospheric chemistrycarbonyl oxidesCriegee intermediatesozonolysis

Identifiers

PMID33283439
PMCPMC8359312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.