ArticleAnalytical chemistry2024
A Semi-Quantitative Approach to Nontarget Compositional Analysis of Complex Samples.
Article in Analytical chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of approaches for quantifying extractables in a variety of polymeric medical device materials with LC-MS/MS.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Integrated Targeted and Suspect Screening Workflow for Identifying PFAS of Concern in Urban-Impacted Serbian Rivers.Toxics · 2026Article
- AI redefine untargeted metabolomics: estimating chemical amounts for a Human Exposome Project.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Article
- Doping Detection Based on the Nanoscale: Biosensing Mechanisms and Applications of Two-Dimensional Materials.Biosensors · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nontarget analysis (NTA) by liquid chromatography coupled to high-resolution mass spectrometry improves the capacity to comprehend the molecular composition of complex mixtures compared to targeted analysis techniques. However, the detection of unknown compounds means that quantification in NTA is challenging. This study proposes a new semi-quantitative methodology for use in the NTA of organic aerosol. Quantification of unknowns is achieved using the average ionization efficiency of multiple quantification standards which elute within the same retention time window as the unknown analytes. In total, 110 authentic standards constructed 25 retention time windows for the quantification of oxygenated (CHO) and organonitrogen (CHON) species. The method was validated on extracts of biomass burning organic aerosol (BBOA) and compared to quantification with authentic standards and had an average prediction error of 1.52 times. Furthermore, 70% of concentrations were estimated within a factor of 2 (prediction errors between 0.5 and 2 times) from the authentic standard quantification. The semi-quantification method also showed good agreement for the quantification of CHO compounds compared to predictive ionization efficiency-based methods, whereas for CHON species, the prediction error of the semi-quantification method (1.63) was significantly lower than the predictive ionization efficiency approach (14.94). Application to BBOA for the derivation of relative abundances of CHO and CHON species showed that using peak area underestimated the relative abundance of CHO by 19% and overestimated that of CHON by 11% compared to the semi-quantification method. These differences could lead to significant misinterpretations of source apportionment in complex samples, highlighting the need to account for ionization differences in NTA approaches.
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.