ReviewAnalytical chemistry2025
Communicating with Stakeholders to Identify High-Impact Research Directions for Non-Targeted Analysis.
Review in Analytical chemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extractable and Leachable Studies on Electronic Nicotine Delivery System (ENDS) Components and E‑liquid Containers.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Analytical approaches for investigation of partially identified leachables in ENDS.Frontiers in chemistry · 2026Article
- Prioritizing Chemical Candidates from Non-targeted Analysis Using Metadata, Spectral Similarity, and Hazard Scoring within INTERPRET NTA.Analytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Examining the effects of analytical replication on data quality in a non-targeted analysis experiment.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Examining structure-based surrogate selection for quantitative non-targeted analysis.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Examining environmental matrix effects on quantitative non-targeted analysis estimates of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Automated QA/QC reporting for non-targeted analysis: a demonstration of "INTERPRET NTA" with de facto water reuse data.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Non-targeted analysis (NTA) using high-resolution mass spectrometry without defined chemical targets has the potential to expand and improve chemical monitoring in many fields. Despite rapid advancements within the research community, NTA methods and data remain underutilized by many potential beneficiaries. To better understand barriers toward widespread adoption, the Best Practices for Non-Targeted Analysis (BP4NTA) working group conducted focus group meetings and follow-up surveys with scientists (n = 61) from various sectors (e.g., drinking water utilities, epidemiologists, n = 9) where NTA is expected to provide future value. Meeting participants included producers and end-users of NTA data with a wide range of familiarity with NTA methods and outputs. Discussions focused on identifying specific barriers that limit adoption and on setting NTA product development priorities. Stated priorities fell into four major categories: 1) education and training materials; 2) QA/QC frameworks and study design guidance; 3) accessible compound databases and libraries; and 4) NTA data linkages with chemical fate and toxicity information. Based on participant feedback, this manuscript proposes research directions, such as standardization of training materials, that BP4NTA and other institutions can pursue to expand NTA use in various application scenarios and decision contexts.
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.