ArticleMetabolites2022
Quantitative Profiling of Bile Acids in Feces of Humans and Rodents by Ultra-High-Performance Liquid Chromatography-Quadrupole Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry.
Article in Metabolites, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unlocking the bile acid universe: advanced workflows and a multidimensional library of 280 unique species.Sustainable microbiology · 2026Article
- A microbiota-derived bile acid modulates biofilm formation by the probiotic strain Escherichia coli Nissle 1917.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2025Article
- A tunable analytical platform for bile acid isomers: from molecular recognition to pharmaceutical quality control.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Chicken Manure as a Sustainable Bile Acid Source for Biotechnological Applications.Microbial biotechnology · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparative profiling of serum, urine, and feces bile acids in humans, rats, and mice.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Article
- Advances in Metabolic Profiling of Biological Samples.Metabolites · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A simple, sensitive, and reliable quantification and identification method was developed and validated for simultaneous analysis of 58 bile acids (BAs) in human and rodent (mouse and rat) fecal samples. The method involves an extraction step with a 5% ammonium-ethanol aqueous solution; the BAs were quantified by high-resolution mass spectrometry (ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with quadrupole-time-of-flight mass spectrometry, UPLC-Q-TOF). The recoveries were 80.05-120.83%, with coefficient variations (CVs) of 0.01-9.82% for three biological species. The limits of detection (LODs) were in the range of 0.01-0.24 μg/kg, and the limits of quantification (LOQs) ranged from 0.03 to 0.81 μg/kg. In addition, the analytical method was used to identify and quantify BAs in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients, C57BL/6 mice, and Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats. The fecal BA profile and analysis of BA indices in these samples provide valuable information for further BA metabolic disorder research.
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.