Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34071244›Full record

ReviewToxins2021

Analytical Separation of Carcinogenic and Genotoxic Alkenylbenzenes in Foods and Related Products (2010-2020).

Huynh N P Dang, Joselito P Quirino

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Toxins, 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
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Huynh N P DangAustralian Centre for Research on Separation Science (ACROSS), School of Natural Sciences-Chemistry, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia.
Joselito P QuirinoAustralian Centre for Research on Separation Science (ACROSS), School of Natural Sciences-Chemistry, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8275-9672
University of Tasmania · AU

Funding

Australian Research Council DP180102810, 2018
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alkenylbenzenes are potentially toxic (genotoxic and carcinogenic) compounds present in plants such as basil, tarragon, anise star and lemongrass. These plants are found in various edible consumer products, e.g., popularly used to flavour food. Thus, there are concerns about the possible health consequences upon increased exposure to alkenylbenzenes especially due to food intake. It is therefore important to constantly monitor the amounts of alkenylbenzenes in our food chain. A major challenge in the determination of alkenylbenzenes in foods is the complexity of the sample matrices and the typically low amounts of alkenylbenzenes present. This review will therefore discuss the background and importance of analytical separation methods from papers reported from 2010 to 2020 for the determination of alkenylbenzenes in foods and related products. The separation techniques commonly used were gas and liquid chromatography (LC). The sample preparation techniques used in conjunction with the separation techniques were various variants of extraction (solvent extraction, liquid-liquid extraction, liquid-phase microextraction, solid phase extraction) and distillation (steam and hydro-). Detection was by flame ionisation and mass spectrometry (MS) in gas chromatography (GC) while in liquid chromatography was mainly by spectrophotometry.

Indexed as

Food AnalysisBenzeneCarcinogensGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryLiquid-Liquid ExtractionLiquid Phase MicroextractionMutagensSolid Phase ExtractionBenzeneCarcinogensMutagensalkenylbenzenescapillary electrophoresisfoodgas chromatographyliquid chromatographysample preparation

Identifiers

PMID34071244
PMCPMC8228529
OpenAlexW3164270420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.