ArticlePloS one2024
High-performance liquid chromatographic method for determination of voriconazole in pure and gel formulation.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For routine measurement of Voriconazole (VZ) in a pure and gel formulation, a quick and accurate RP-HPLC technique with UV detection (254 nm) was developed. With a flow rate of 1.0 ml/min using a mobile phase that contained acetonitrile and water mixed 50:50, v/v. Internal standard approach was used for quantification. The method shows good linearity (correlation coefficient = 0.9999) with acceptable accuracy, precision and robustness. Three elements were taken into account to measure robustness. Flow rate, mobile phase composition, and pH all have an impact on the response, but only the flow rate which causes a reduction in the concentration of the drug-has a significant impact on the response. Analyst, equipment, and days were taken into consideration for a precision measurement. The analytical procedure had good precision, as seen by the %RSD which is found to be less than 2.0. The proposed method was straightforward, extremely sensitive, exact, and accurate, and it had a retention time of less than 4 minutes, indicating that it is appropriate for daily quality control.
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.