ArticleMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Discrimination and Quantification of Cotton and Polyester Textile Samples Using Near-Infrared and Mid-Infrared Spectroscopies.
Article in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Learning Compact Multispectral Signatures for Geographical-Origin Authentication ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Near-Infrared Spectroscopy Coupled with Chemometrics for Rapid Determination of pH, Moisture and Lycopene Content in Lycopene Liquid Beverages.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A spectroscopic dataset for known provenance and post-consumer textiles.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Development of multilayered polymer-BaSOScientific reports · 2026Article
- The Effect of COPolymers · 2026Article
- A hybrid deep-learning-architecture for identifying cotton content in fabric materials.PloS one · 2026Article
- HitoMi-Cam: A Shape-Agnostic Person Detection Method Using the Spectral Characteristics of Clothing.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Article
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
In the textile industry, cotton and polyester (PES) are among the most used fibres to produce clothes. The correct identification and accurate composition estimate of fibres are mandatory, and environmentally friendly and precise techniques are welcome. In this context, the use of near-infrared (NIR) and mid-infrared (MIR) spectroscopies to distinguish between cotton and PES samples and further estimate the cotton content of blended samples were evaluated. Infrared spectra were acquired and modelled through diverse chemometric models: principal component analysis; partial least squares discriminant analysis; and partial least squares (PLS) regression. Both techniques (NIR and MIR) presented good potential for cotton and PES sample discrimination, although the results obtained with NIR spectroscopy were slightly better. Regarding cotton content estimates, the calibration errors of the PLS models were 3.3% and 6.5% for NIR and MIR spectroscopy, respectively. The PLS models were validated with two different sets of samples: prediction set 1, containing blended cotton + PES samples (like those used in the calibration step), and prediction set 2, containing cotton + PES + distinct fibre samples. Prediction set 2 was included to address one of the biggest known drawbacks of such chemometric models, which is the prediction of sample types that are not used in the calibration. Despite the poorer results obtained for prediction set 2, all the errors were lower than 8%, proving the suitability of the techniques for cotton content estimation. It should be stressed that the textile samples used in this work came from different geographic origins (cotton) and were of distinct presentations (raw, yarn, knitted/woven fabric), which strengthens our findings.
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.