ArticleMikrochimica acta2025
A novel electrochemical sensor based on NiO/MoS
Article in Mikrochimica acta, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A novel electrochemical sensor (NiO/MoS₂/rGO/GCE) designed for the sensitive detection of methyl parathion (MP) pesticide residues has been developed. The NiO/MoS₂/rGO composite was synthesized via hydrothermal and solvothermal methods, with successful formation and optimized microstructural characteristics validated through scanning electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. Empirical results demonstrated that the incorporation of NiO markedly augmented both the electrochemically active sites and electron-transfer efficiency, thereby enabling the sensor to achieve an excellent linear detection range of 0.01-10 μg/mL for MP, accompanied by a notably low detection limit of 1.1 ng/mL (S/N = 3). Furthermore, the sensor exhibited superior anti-interference performance, achieving recovery percentages ranging from 97.7 to 108.8% in practical sample analyses (apple juice), with relative standard deviations (RSD) between 2.7 and 5.2%. Overall, this research offers a promising and cost-effective approach for highly sensitive pesticide residue detection, underscoring its substantial potential for broad practical applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40549073What 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.