Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38312491›Full record

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.

Trevor A Johnson, Dimitri P Abrahamsson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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.

Trevor A JohnsonDivision of Environmental Pediatrics, Department of Pediatrics, Grossman School of Medicine, New York University.
Dimitri P AbrahamssonDivision of Environmental Pediatrics, Department of Pediatrics, Grossman School of Medicine, New York University.

Funding

Non-target analysis of maternal and cord blood samples: Advancing computational tools and discovering novel chemicalsR00ES032892 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI ABRAHAMSSON, DIMITRI · 2023 to 2025
$745k
Non-target analysis of maternal and cord blood samples: Advancing computational tools and discovering novel chemicalsK99ES032892 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI ABRAHAMSSON, DIMITRI · 2021 to 2022
$200k
NIEHS NIH HHS K99 ES032892NIEHS NIH HHS R00 ES032892
6 · The paper itself

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

analytical standardselectrospray ionizationhigh resolution mass spectrometryNon-targeted analysispredictionquantification

Identifiers

PMID38312491
PMCPMC10836048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.