Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35501505›Full record

ReviewAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2022

Sample preparation techniques for extraction of vitamin D metabolites from non-conventional biological sample matrices prior to LC-MS/MS analysis.

Anastasia Alexandridou, Dietrich A Volmer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Analysis of vitamin DJournal of chromatography. B, Analytical technologies in the biomedical and life sciences · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Pediatric vitamin D: Pseudo-hypervitaminosis.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Stability of sample extracts of vitamin DAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2023
    Article
  11. 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.

Anastasia AlexandridouBioanalytical Chemistry, Humboldt University Berlin, Brook-Taylor-Str. 2, 12489, Berlin, Germany.
Dietrich A VolmerBioanalytical Chemistry, Humboldt University Berlin, Brook-Taylor-Str. 2, 12489, Berlin, Germany. Dietrich.Volmer@hu-berlin.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The determination of vitamin D metabolites as status marker or for diagnostic purposes is almost entirely conducted from blood serum or plasma. Other biological matrices, however, have also interested researchers, for two main reasons: (1) alternative matrices may allow non-invasive sampling, permit easier sample transfer and require less demanding storage conditions; and (2) the levels of vitamin D metabolites in other body compartments may further aid the understanding of vitamin D metabolism and function. Thus, the development of reliable and efficient sample preparation protocols for sample matrices other than serum/plasma, which will remove potential interferences and selectively extract the targeted metabolites, is of great importance. This review summarizes sample preparation methods for measurement of vitamin D metabolites using liquid chromatography-(tandem)mass spectrometry in more than ten different human tissues, including hair, saliva, adipose tissue, brain and others.

Indexed as

CalcifediolTandem Mass SpectrometryBiomarkersChromatography, LiquidHumansSpecimen HandlingVitamin DBiomarkersCalcifediolVitamin D25-Hydroxyvitamin D3Alternative/non-conventional biological samplesLC–MS/MSSample preparationVitamin D metabolites

Identifiers

PMID35501505
PMCPMC9174318

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.