Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38716127›Full record

ArticleAnalytical science advances2020

An investigation of the utility of QuEChERS for extracting acid, base, neutral and amphiphilic species from example environmental and clinical matrices.

Rachel Townsend, Geertje van Keulen, Claire Desbrow, Amy Ruth Godfrey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Analytical science advances, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

4 authors.

Rachel TownsendSwansea University Medical School Swansea UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8019-6511
Geertje van KeulenSwansea University Medical School Swansea UK.
Claire DesbrowBiotage GB Limited Hengoed UK.
Amy Ruth GodfreySwansea University Medical School Swansea UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate measurement of the composition of complex samples is key for the safety and efficacy of a range of products used in daily life, with sample preparation a critical step in this workflow. QuEChERS is one such method, however published protocols do not explicitly address acidic, basic, neutral, and amphiphilic species in a single protocol and often use extra steps or an alternative preparation to recover the breadth of chemical types. Our work addresses this need by investigating the use of QuEChERS for monitoring this wide range of chemistries within environmental solids and blood plasma, using a protocol that can accommodate both milliliter and microliter sample volumes. While published methods can require significant resource and time, our approach offers a reduction in preparation time (for environmental samples), with the "micro-QuEChERS" protocol offering a further reduction in cost. The analytical performance of these methods were assessed using reversed-phase LC-MS and showed good accuracy, precision, and sensitivity for the expected concentrations in the tested applications. Target analytes of variable lipophilicity/acidity were extracted and isolated from soil, with largely repeatable matrix effects < 15%RSD and recoveries of 39-100%. An initial "proof-of-concept" investigation using the "micro-QuEChERS" protocol showed reduced matrix enhancement (median value of 90%ME) for soil, and improved matrix effects and recovery (>65%) for blood plasma. This novel sample preparation method can therefore offer an improved approach with wider applicability providing "cleaner" extracts than other methods used for high-throughput clinical analysis.

Indexed as

clinical analysisenvironmental solidsliquid chromatography‐mass spectrometrymedicinal compoundsQuEChERS

Identifiers

PMID38716127
PMCPMC10989089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.