Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40765977›Full record

ReviewJournal of applied crystallography2025

Powder diffraction data beyond the pattern: a practical review.

Nicola Casati, Elena Boldyreva

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of applied crystallography, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Nicola CasatiPaul Scherrer Institute 111 Forschungstrasse 5232Villigen Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4206-9239
Elena BoldyrevaBoreskov Institute of Catalysis RAS, Lavrentiev Ave. 5, Novosibirsk 630090, Russian Federation.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1401-2438

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We share personal experience in the fields of materials science and high-pressure research, discussing which parameters, in addition to positions of peak maxima and intensities, may be important to control and to document in order to make deposited powder diffraction data reusable, reproducible and replicable. We discuss, in particular, which data can be considered as 'raw' and some challenges of revisiting deposited powder diffraction data. We consider procedures such as identifying ('fingerprinting') a known phase in a sample, solving a bulk crystal structure from powder data, and analyzing the size of coherently scattering domains, lattice strain, the type of defects or preferred orientation of crystallites. The specific case of characterizing a multi-phase multi-grain sample following

Indexed as

2D to 1D conversionFAIR datahigh-pressure dataimagesin situ mechanochemical studiesmaterialsmetadatamineralsparticle statisticspowder diffractionraw data

Identifiers

PMID40765977
PMCPMC12321027

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.