ArticleCurrent opinion in environmental science & health2024
Quantification of chemicals in non-targeted analysis without analytical standards - Understanding the mechanism of electrospray ionization and making predictions.
Article in Current opinion in environmental science & health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining structure-based surrogate selection for quantitative non-targeted analysis.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Non-Targeted Analysis of Environmental Contaminants and Their Associations with Semen Health Factors in Men from New York City.Environment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 2025Article
- Modeling the relative response factor of small molecules in positive electrospray ionization.RSC advances · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The constant creation and release of new chemicals to the environment is forming an ever-widening gap between available analytical standards and known chemicals. Developing non-targeted analysis (NTA) methods that have the ability to detect a broad spectrum of compounds is critical for research and analysis of emerging contaminants. There is a need to develop methods that make it possible to identify compound structures from their MS and MS/MS information and quantify them without analytical standards. Method refinements that utilize machine learning algorithms and chemical descriptors to estimate the instrument response of particular compounds have made progress in recent years. This narrative review seeks to summarize the current state of the field of non-targeted analysis (NTA) toward quantification of unknowns without the use of analytical standards. Despite the limited accumulation of validation studies on real samples, the ongoing enhancement in data processing and refinement of machine learning tools could lead to more comprehensive chemical coverage of NTA and validated quantitative NTA methods, thus boosting confidence in their usage and enhancing the utility of quantitative NTA.
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.