ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2023
Performance evaluation of E-nose and E-tongue combined with machine learning for qualitative and quantitative assessment of bear bile powder.
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. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Two Standards-Aided LC-MS Technologies Uncover 30 "Unreported" Compounds in Natural Bear Bile Powder to Add a New Pharmacopoeia Quality-Marker.Journal of separation science · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Intelligent Sensory Systems for Quality Evaluation of Traditional Chinese Medicine: A Review of Electronic Nose, Electronic Tongue, and Machine Vision Approaches.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A Novel Strategy for Rapid Quantification of Multiple Quality Indicators and Grade Discrimination ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Identification of bile powder based on component data matrix and progressive matching strategy combined with UHPLC-QTOF-MS.Biochemistry and biophysics reports · 2025Article
- Comprehensive Analysis of Bile-derived Medicinal Materials Based on Ultra-High-Performance Liquid Chromatography Coupled With Charged Aerosol Detection and Chemometrics.Analytical science advances · 2025Article
- Identification of Chemical Components in Three Types of Rose Essential Oils Based on Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) and Chemometric Methods.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Discrimination of poisonous and medicinal plants with similar appearance (Frontiers in chemistry · 2025Article
- Comprehensive Analysis of Bile Medicines Based on UHPLC-QTOF-MSACS omega · 2024Article
- A Comprehensive Analysis of Fel Ursi and Its Common Adulterants Based on UHPLC-QTOF-MSMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Critical View on the Qualification of Electronic Tongues Regarding Their Performance in the Development of Peroral Drug Formulations with Bitter Ingredients.Pharmaceutics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bear bile powder (BBP) is a valuable animal-derived product with a huge adulteration problem on market. It is a crucially important task to identify BBP and its counterfeit. Electronic sensory technologies are the inheritance and development of traditional empirical identification. Considering that each drug has its own specific odor and taste characteristics, electronic tongue (E-tongue), electronic nose (E-nose) and GC-MS were used to evaluate the aroma and taste of BBP and its common counterfeit. Two active components of BBP, namely tauroursodeoxycholic acid (TUDCA) and taurochenodeoxycholic acid (TCDCA) were measured and linked with the electronic sensory data. The results showed that bitterness was the main flavor of TUDCA in BBP, saltiness and umami were the main flavor of TCDCA. The volatiles detected by E-nose and GC-MS were mainly aldehydes, ketones, alcohols, hydrocarbons, carboxylic acids, heterocyclic, lipids, and amines, mainly earthy, musty, coffee, bitter almond, burnt, pungent odor descriptions. Four different machine learning algorithms (backpropagation neural network, support vector machine, K-nearest neighbor, and random forest) were used to identify BBP and its counterfeit, and the regression performance of these four algorithms was also evaluated. For qualitative identification, the algorithm of random forest has shown the best performance, with 100% accuracy, precision, recall and F1-score. Also, the random forest algorithm has the best R
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.