ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2025
Examining environmental matrix effects on quantitative non-targeted analysis estimates of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring the exposome: a practical guide for using wearable passive samplers to assess environmental influences.Exposome · 2026Article
- AI redefine untargeted metabolomics: estimating chemical amounts for a Human Exposome Project.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Prioritizing Chemical Candidates from Non-targeted Analysis Using Metadata, Spectral Similarity, and Hazard Scoring within INTERPRET NTA.Analytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Examining structure-based surrogate selection for quantitative non-targeted analysis.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Examining the effects of analytical replication on data quality in a non-targeted analysis experiment.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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Non-targeted analysis (NTA) is commonly used for the detection and identification of emerging pollutants, including many per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). While NTA outputs are often non-quantitative, concentration estimation is now possible using quantitative non-targeted analysis (qNTA) approaches. To date, few studies have examined matrix effects on qNTA performance, and little is therefore known about the implications of matrix effects on qNTA results and interpretations. Using a set of 19 PFAS, we examined the impacts of drinking water (DW) and waste-activated sludge matrices on qNTA performance across three qNTA approaches: one structure-independent approach based on "global" surrogates and two structure-dependent approaches based on "expert-selected" surrogates and predicted ionization efficiency (IE) regression. The performance of each qNTA approach was examined separately for the PFAS prepared in pure solvent, DW extract, and sludge extract using leave-one-out modeling. Performance was evaluated using previously defined qNTA metrics that describe predictive accuracy, uncertainty, and reliability. The studied sample matrices had minimal effects on qNTA accuracy and larger effects on qNTA uncertainty and reliability. Using solvent-based surrogate data to inform matrix-based estimations yielded lower uncertainty, but also lower reliability, emphasizing that uncertainty must be considered in context of reliability. No single qNTA approach uniformly performed best across all comparisons. Since the IE regression and global surrogates approaches proved most reliable, we recommended them for future qNTA applications. This study highlights the importance of examining multiple performance metrics and utilizing matrix-matched surrogate data in qNTA studies.
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.