ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Evaluation of a Commercial Electronic Nose Based on Carbon Nanotube Chemiresistors.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Graphene Nanosensor for the Detection of Small Organic Compounds Using an Insect Olfactory Receptor.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Article
- Performance of a Novel Electronic Nose for the Detection of Volatile Organic Compounds Relating to Starvation or Human Decomposition Post-Mass Disaster.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently a hand-held, carbon-nanotube-based electronic nose became available on the market. Such an electronic nose could be interesting for applications in the food industry, health monitoring, environmental monitoring, and security services. However, not much is known about the performance of such an electronic nose. In a series of measurements, the instrument was exposed to low ppm vapor concentrations of four volatile organic compounds with different scent profiles and polarities. Detection limits, linearity of response, repeatability, reproducibility, and scent patterns were determined. The results indicate detection limits in the range of 0.1-0.5 ppm and a linear signal response in the range of 0.5-8.0 ppm. The repeatability of the scent patterns at compound concentrations of 2 ppm allowed the identification of the tested volatiles based on their scent pattern. However, the reproducibility was not sufficient, since different scent profiles were produced on different measurement days. In addition, it was noted that the response of the instrument diminished over time (over several months) possibly by sensor poisoning. The latter two aspects limit the use of the current instrument and make future improvements necessary.
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.