ArticleCommunications chemistry2025
Improved methodology to survey veterinary antibiotics in environmental samples using µSPEed microextraction followed by ultraperformance liquid chromatography.
Article in Communications chemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A μSPEed microextraction combined with ultra-performance liquid chromatography (UHPLC) with UV detection was developed for analysing six veterinary antibiotics (tetracycline, chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, doxycycline, sulfamethoxazole, and trimethoprim) in environmental samples. To optimise extraction, 12 sorbent cartridges, sample loading cycles, volumes, and pH were assayed. The PS/DVB-RP cartridge, three 250 μL sample loading cycles, and two 50-µL elutions with acidified methanol yielded maximum efficiency. The method was validated with optimised fast chromatographic separation, showing good linearity (R2 > 0.99), precision (RSD < 20%), and recoveries between 46-86%. Detection and quantification limits ranged from 0.30-1.23 μg L
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.