Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36464720›Full record

ReviewAnalytical sciences : the international journal of the Japan Society for Analytical Chemistry2023

Progress and current trends in the electrochemical determination of phosphate ions for environmental and biological monitoring applications.

Shaimah Rinda Sari, Masato Tominaga

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Analytical sciences : the international journal of the Japan Society for Analytical Chemistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shaimah Rinda SariGraduate School of Science and Engineering, Saga University, Saga, 840-8502, Japan.
Masato TominagaGraduate School of Science and Engineering, Saga University, Saga, 840-8502, Japan. masato@cc.saga-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1103-7576
Saga University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The determination of phosphate ions in biological testing is critical for environmental safety. A reliable and accurate method is required to measure the true phosphate ion concentrations; in this regard, the electrochemical method is preferable because of its simple operation, fast response, and high sensitivity. By compiling existing electroanalytical techniques, researchers can compare the advantages and disadvantages of each method. This review examines the progress and recent advances in electrochemical sensing strategies adapted for the determination of phosphate ions in the environmental and during biological monitoring. We first discuss the history of phosphorus and the development of methods to detect phosphates. The recognition elements of phosphate ion sensors for environmental applications include metal-based, nanomaterial-based, carbon-based, and enzymatic electrodes. Phosphate determination in biological samples, such as blood serum, drugs, and other biological fluids, such as urine and saliva, as well as phosphate esters, is also discussed. The final part of our review addresses the current challenges that phosphate sensing technology faces and illustrates future opportunities for more reliable phosphate detection.

Indexed as

Biological MonitoringNanostructuresCarbonElectrochemical TechniquesIonsPhosphatesCarbonIonsPhosphatesBiologicalElectrochemistryEnvironmentalPhosphate ionSensor

Identifiers

PMID36464720
OpenAlexW4310659814

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.