ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2020
Potential of the Electronic Nose for the Detection of Respiratory Diseases with and without Infection.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of volatile organic compounds analysis and electronic noses for detecting colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Exhaled Aldehydes and Ketones as Biomarkers of Lung Cancer and Diabetes: Review of Sensor Technologies for Early Disease Diagnosis.Biosensors · 2025Review
- Differentiating Pulmonary Nodule Malignancy Using Exhaled Volatile Organic Compounds: A Prospective Observational Study.Cancer medicine · 2025Observational
- Article
- Exhaled Breath Analysis Detects the Clearance ofBiomedicines · 2024Article
- AlternativeFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Review
- Research progress of electronic nose technology in exhaled breath disease analysis.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2023Review
- Humans can detect axillary odor cues of an acute respiratory infection in others.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2023Article
- The accuracy of an electronic nose to diagnose tuberculosis in patients referred to an expert centre.PloS one · 2023Article
- Review
- Non-Invasive Breath Analysis for Disease Screening and Diagnoses.Biosensors · 2022Article
- Breath Analysis: A Promising Tool for Disease Diagnosis-The Role of Sensors.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- From COPD to Lung Cancer: Mechanisms Linking, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognosis.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2022Review
- VOCs Sensing by Metal Oxides, Conductive Polymers, and Carbon-Based Materials.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Volatile Organic Compounds Produced by Human Pathogenic Fungi Are Toxic toFrontiers in fungal biology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Respiratory tract infections are common, and when affecting the lower airways and lungs, can result in significant morbidity and mortality. There is an unfilled need for simple, non-invasive tools that can be used to screen for such infections at the clinical point of care. The electronic nose (eNose) is a novel technology that detects volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Early studies have shown that certain diseases and infections can result in characteristic changes in VOC profiles in the exhaled breath. This review summarizes current knowledge on breath analysis by the electronic nose and its potential for the detection of respiratory diseases with and without infection.
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.