ReviewTopics in current chemistry (Cham)2024
Porous Polymer Sorbents in Micro Solid Phase Extraction: Applications, Advantages, and Challenges.
Review in Topics in current chemistry (Cham), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Miniaturised Extraction Techniques in Personalised Medicine: Analytical Opportunities and Translational Perspectives.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A novel MOF-on-MOF composite versus its MOF shell: a comparative sorbent study for dispersive micro-solid phase extraction of pesticides in food samples.Food chemistry: X · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, porous polymers have gained significant attention for their application as powerful and selective sorbents in micro solid phase extraction (µSPE). In this review we explore the preparation and utilization of various porous polymer sorbents, highlighting their impact on enhancing µSPE techniques. Molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs), graphene oxide-modified frameworks, and zeolitic imidazole frameworks (ZIFs) are among the innovative materials discussed. These innovative materials have significantly improved µSPE methods, offering enhanced extraction efficiencies, superior selectivity, and reduced solvent consumption, all of which align with the principles of green chemistry. Key findings of this review include the demonstration that MIPs exhibit excellent target specificity, making them ideal for complex matrices, while graphene oxide frameworks and ZIFs provide increased surface area and stability for diverse analytical applications. Despite these advancements, challenges remain, particularly the high cost of certain innovative materials, limited reusability, and the absence of automation in µSPE workflows. Furthermore, controlling the precise synthesis and functionalization of these sorbents continues to be a limiting factor. To address these issues, future research should focus on developing cost-effectiveness methods, the use of biopolymer or sustainable feedstocks, and scalable synthesis methods; integrating automation into µSPE; and exploring new polymeric materials with enhanced properties. Additionally, novel hybrid materials that combine the strengths of multiple sorbents offer a promising direction for future exploration. We critically analyze the advantages and limitations of each sorbent type, providing a comprehensive overview of their applications in µSPE. This paper also examines the synthesis, characterization, and unique properties of these porous polymers, emphasizing their role in advancing analytical chemistry towards more efficient and environmentally friendly practices. The need for continued development of high-performance, low-cost, and sustainable sorbents is underscored to further enhance the effectiveness of µSPE techniques.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39557712What 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.