Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34024002›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental science and pollution research international2021

Molecularly imprinted polymers in toxicology: a literature survey for the last 5 years.

Kazım Köse, Demet Yalçın Kehribar, Lokman Uzun

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

Kazım KöseDepartment of Joint Courses, Hitit University, Çorum, Turkey. kazimkose@hitit.edu.tr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1467-2898
Demet Yalçın KehribarDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ondokuz Mayis University, Samsun, Turkey.
Lokman UzunDepartment of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. lokman@hacettepe.edu.tr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The science of toxicology dates back almost to the beginning of human history. Toxic chemicals, which are encountered in different forms, are always among the chemicals that should be investigated in criminal field, environmental application, pharmaceutic, and even industry, where many researches have been carried out studies for years. Almost all of not only drugs but also industrial dyes have toxic side and direct effects. Environmental micropollutants accumulate in the tissues of all living things, especially plants, and show short- or long-term toxic symptoms. Chemicals in forensic science can be known by detecting the effect they cause to the body with the similar mechanism. It is clear that the best tracking tool among analysis methods is molecularly printed polymer-based analytical setups. Different polymeric combinations of molecularly imprinted polymers allow further study on detection or extraction using chromatographic and spectroscopic instruments. In particular, methods used in forensic medicine can detect trace amounts of poison or biological residues on the scene. Molecularly imprinted polymers are still in their infancy and have many variables that need to be developed. In this review, we summarized how molecular imprinted polymers and toxicology intersect and what has been done about molecular imprinted polymers in toxicology by looking at the studies conducted in the last 5 years.

Indexed as

Molecular ImprintingHumansMolecularly Imprinted PolymersPolymersSpectrum AnalysisMolecularly Imprinted PolymersPolymersDetectionForensicMIPPharmaceuticSensorToxicology

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.