Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36105159›Full record

ReviewJournal of pharmaceutical analysis2022

Current developments of bioanalytical sample preparation techniques in pharmaceuticals.

Rahul G Ingle, Su Zeng, Huidi Jiang, Wei-Jie Fang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pharmaceutical analysis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. A Species-SpecificBiology · 2026
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Rahul G IngleInstitute of Drug Metabolism and Pharmaceutical Analysis, College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310058, China.
Su ZengInstitute of Drug Metabolism and Pharmaceutical Analysis, College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310058, China.
Huidi JiangInstitute of Drug Metabolism and Pharmaceutical Analysis, College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310058, China.
Wei-Jie FangInstitute of Drug Metabolism and Pharmaceutical Analysis, College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310058, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sample preparation is considered as the bottleneck step in bioanalysis because each biological matrix has its own unique challenges and complexity. Competent sample preparation to extract the desired analytes and remove redundant components is a crucial step in each bioanalytical approach. The matrix effect is a key hurdle in bioanalytical sample preparation, which has gained extensive consideration. Novel sample preparation techniques have advantages over classical techniques in terms of accuracy, automation, ease of sample preparation, storage, and shipment and have become increasingly popular over the past decade. Our objective is to provide a broad outline of current developments in various bioanalytical sample preparation techniques in chromatographic and spectroscopic examinations. In addition, how these techniques have gained considerable attention over the past decade in bioanalytical research is mentioned with preferred examples. Modern trends in bioanalytical sample preparation techniques, including sorbent-based microextraction techniques, are primarily emphasized.

Indexed as

BioanalysisBiological matricesMatrix effectMicroextractionSample preparation technique

Identifiers

PMID36105159
PMCPMC9463481

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.