Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35548716›Full record

ReviewRSC advances2018

Scope and advances in the catalytic propargylic substitution reaction.

Rashmi Roy, Satyajit Saha

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in RSC advances, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 136 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Rice husk-SiORSC advances · 2020
    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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rashmi RoyIIT Kanpur India.
Satyajit SahaDepartment of Dyestuff Technology, ICT Mumbai N. P. Marg, Matunga-400019 Mumbai Maharashtra India ss.saha@ictmumbai.edu.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0407-7251
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur · INInternational Centre for Theoretical Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nucleophilic displacement of the propargylic alcohol is one of the sought-after methods in the current scenario. The highly nucleophilic alkyne functional moiety along with its considerably acidic terminal hydrogen atom allows the propargylic unit to play a crucial role in organic synthesis by offering a handle for further synthetic transformations. Until 2000, the most fundamental propargylic substitution reaction was the Nicolas reaction, a multi-step transformation, developed in 1972, which involved cobalt as a stoichiometric promoter. Therefore, the direct catalytic substitution of propargylic alcohols was a highly desirable method for development. The pioneering work on the Ru-catalyzed propargylic substitution reaction in 2000 encouraged many researchers to develop several novel catalytic propargylic substitution reactions, which have made rapid progress since then. The purpose of this review is to emphasise the involvement of diverse types of Lewis acid, transition metal and Brønsted acid catalysts in the propargylic substitution reaction and provide an updated summary of the recent developments in this field. The selected examples presented here are the most significant and relevant ones and we believe that this will help the readers to comprehend the scope of the propargylic substitution reaction with diverse types of catalysts and will envisage the scientific community for the future developments in this field.

Identifiers

PMID35548716
PMCPMC9085608
OpenAlexW2890886050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.