ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
MOX Sensors for Authenticity Assessment and Adulteration Detection in Extra Virgin Olive Oil (EVOO).
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data-Driven MOX Chemosensing for Beer Discrimination: Towards Rapid Food Quality Screening.Micromachines · 2026Article
- Peptide-Functionalized Silicon-Photonic E‑Nose for Monitoring Oxidation in Extra Virgin Olive Oil.ACS measurement science au · 2026Article
- A Novel Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Method for Electronic Nose Design Based on Olfactometry Data.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Food fraud, particularly in the olive oil sector, represents a pressing concern within the agri-food industry, with implications for consumer trust and product authenticity. Certified products like Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) Extra Virgin Olive Oil (EVOO) are premium products that undergo strict quality controls, must comply with specific production regulations, and generally have a higher market price. These characteristics make them particularly vulnerable to economically motivated adulteration. In this study, the adulteration of PDO EVOO with Olive Pomace Oil (POO) and Olive Oil (OO) was investigated through a combined analytical approach. A traditional technique, gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) combined with solid-phase microextraction (SPME), was employed alongside an innovative method based on an electronic nose equipped with metal oxide semiconductor (MOX) sensors. GC-MS analysis enabled the identification of characteristic volatile compounds, providing a detailed chemical fingerprint of the different oil samples. Concurrently, the MOX sensor array successfully detected variations in the volatile profiles released by the adulterated oils, demonstrating its potential as a rapid and cost-effective screening tool. The complementary use of both techniques highlighted the reliability of MOX sensors in differentiating authentic PDO EVOO from adulterated samples and underscored their applicability in routine quality control and fraud prevention strategies.
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.