Fluorescent polydopamine nanoparticles as a nanosensor for the sequential detection of mercury ions and l-ascorbic acid based on a coordination effect and redox reaction.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Nitrogen and Sulfur Co-doped Carbon Quantum Dots for Detecting FeJournal of fluorescence · 2025
   Article
2. Captivating nano sensors for mercury detection: a promising approach for monitoring of toxic mercury in environmental samples.RSC advances · 2024
   Review
3. Electropolymerization of Polydopamine at Electrode-Supported Insulating Mesoporous Films.Chemistry of materials : a publication of the American Chemical Society · 2023
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract