Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36801959›Full record

ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2023

Evaluating important analytical figures of merit for PILSNER: particle-into-liquid sampling for nanoliter electrochemical reactions.

Philip Kauffmann, Jeffrey Dick

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Philip KauffmannDepartment of Chemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47906, USA.
Jeffrey DickDepartment of Chemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47906, USA. jdick@purdue.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4538-9705

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recently introduced as a method for aerosol electroanalysis, particle-into-liquid sampling for nanoliter electrochemical reactions (PILSNER) has shown promise as a versatile, highly sensitive analytical technique. To further validate the analytical figures of merit, we present correlated fluorescence microscopy and electrochemical data. The results show excellent agreement as to the detected concentration of a common redox mediator, ferrocyanide. Experimental data also suggest that PILSNER's unconventional two-electrode system is not a contributing source of error when appropriate controls are established. Finally, we address the concern that arises from two electrodes operating within such close proximity. COMSOL Multiphysics simulations confirm that with the present parameters, positive feedback is not a contributing source of error in voltammetric experiments. The simulations also show at what distances feedback could become a source of concern, which will be a factor in future investigations. Thus, this paper provides validation of PILSNER's analytical figures of merit, as well as voltammetric controls and COMSOL Multiphysics simulations to address possible confounding factors that could arise from PILSNER's experimental setup.

Indexed as

ElectrodesAerosolsMicroscopy, FluorescenceOxidation-ReductionAerosolsAerosolsComputer simulationsCorrelated microscopyElectrodes

Identifiers

PMID36801959

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.