ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2022
Development and application of an in-house library and workflow for gas chromatography-electron ionization-accurate-mass/high-resolution mass spectrometry screening of environmental samples.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interactive Software for Interpreting and Curating High-Resolution Electron Ionization Mass Spectra.Journal of mass spectrometry : JMS · 2026Article
- Refining EI-MS library search results through atomic-level insights.Communications chemistry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This work presents an optimized gas chromatography-electron ionization-high-resolution mass spectrometry (GC-EI-HRMS) screening method. Different method parameters affecting data processing with the Agilent Unknowns Analysis SureMass deconvolution software were optimized in order to achieve the best compromise between false positives and false negatives. To this end, an accurate-mass library of 26 model compounds was created. Then, five replicates of mussel extracts were spiked with a mixture of these 26 compounds at two concentration levels (10 and 100 ng/g dry weight in mussel, 50 and 500 ng/mL in extract) and injected in the GC-EI-HRMS system. The results of these experiments showed that accurate mass tolerance and pure weight factor (combination of reverse-forward library search) are the most critical factors. The validation of the developed method afforded screening detection limits in the 2.5-5 ng range for passive sampler extracts and 1-2 ng/g for mussel sample extracts, and limits of quantification in the 0.6-3.2 ng and 0.1-1.8 ng/g range, for the same type of samples, respectively, for 17 model analytes. Once the method was optimized, an accurate-mass HRMS library, containing retention indexes, with ca. 355 spectra of derivatized and non-derivatized compounds was generated. This library (freely available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5647960 ), together with a modified Agilent Pesticides Library of over 800 compounds, was applied to the screening of passive samplers, both of polydimethylsiloxane and polar chemical integrative samplers (POCIS), and mussel samples collected in Galicia (NW Spain), where a total of 75 chemicals could be identified.
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.