Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40227355›Full record

ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2025

Study of sampling phases for body odor sampling prior to analysis by TD-GC×GC/ToFMS.

Elsa Boudard, Lisa Fisson, Nabil Moumane, José Dugay, Jérôme Vial, Didier Thiébaut

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Elsa BoudardUMR CBI, Laboratoire des Sciences Analytiques, Bioanalytiques et Miniaturisation, ESPCI Paris, PSL Research University, 10 rue Vauquelin, 75231, Paris, Cedex 05, France. elsa.boudard@espci.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3844-5008
Lisa FissonUMR CBI, Laboratoire des Sciences Analytiques, Bioanalytiques et Miniaturisation, ESPCI Paris, PSL Research University, 10 rue Vauquelin, 75231, Paris, Cedex 05, France.
Nabil MoumaneSenseDetect Health-Care, 21 grande rue, 78240, Aigremont, France.
José DugayUMR CBI, Laboratoire des Sciences Analytiques, Bioanalytiques et Miniaturisation, ESPCI Paris, PSL Research University, 10 rue Vauquelin, 75231, Paris, Cedex 05, France.
Jérôme VialUMR CBI, Laboratoire des Sciences Analytiques, Bioanalytiques et Miniaturisation, ESPCI Paris, PSL Research University, 10 rue Vauquelin, 75231, Paris, Cedex 05, France.
Didier ThiébautUMR CBI, Laboratoire des Sciences Analytiques, Bioanalytiques et Miniaturisation, ESPCI Paris, PSL Research University, 10 rue Vauquelin, 75231, Paris, Cedex 05, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Body odor consists of a complex matrix of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which has garnered increasing interest in fields like medicine for its potential in disease diagnosis. However, the field of body odor analysis is advancing slowly, partly due to a lack of standardized methodologies. Although gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) is widely used for VOC analysis, there is a broad range of sampling and extraction methods, leading to different or even sometimes contradictory results. To move toward standardized procedures, this study compares five sampling phases for direct body odor sampling in terms of analytical cleanliness and VOC trapping/release efficiency: gauze, glass beads, PowerSorb

Indexed as

Gas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryOdorantsVolatile Organic CompoundsHumansLimit of DetectionReproducibility of ResultsVolatile Organic CompoundsBody odorBody volatolomeGC×GCSamplingVOCs

Identifiers

PMID40227355
PMCPMC12103381

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.