ArticleJournal of analytical methods in chemistry2024
Direct Extraction and Determination of Free Nicotine in Cigarette Smoke.
Article in Journal of analytical methods in chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The accurate determination of the free nicotine content in cigarette smoke is crucial for assessing cigarette quality, studying harm and addiction, and reducing tar levels. Currently, the determination of free nicotine in tobacco products primarily relies on methods such as pH calculation, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, headspace solid-phase microextraction (HS-SPME), and traditional solvent extraction. However, these methods have limitations that restrict their widespread application. In this study, the free nicotine in cigarette smoke was directly extracted by using cyclohexane according to the traditional solvent extraction method and detected via gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Compared with the traditional two-phase solvent extraction, our experimental method is easy to execute and eliminates the influence of aqueous solutions on the original distribution of nicotine in cigarette smoke particulate matter. Furthermore, the presence of protonated nicotine in tobacco does not affect the determination. Compared with HS-SPME and NMR spectroscopy, our approach, which involves solvent extraction followed by chromatographic separation and instrumental detection, offers simplicity, improved precision, better detection limits, and reduced interference during the instrumental detection stage. The standard addition recoveries in the conducted experiment ranged from 96.2% to 102.5%. The limit of detection was 2.8
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.