ArticleJournal of radioanalytical and nuclear chemistry2025
Neutron activation analysis of manganese in samples of human sternum.
Article in Journal of radioanalytical and nuclear 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A compact neutron activation analysis (NAA) system utilizing a deuterium-deuterium (DD) neutron generator was developed to detect manganese (Mn) in bone in vivo. Mn was selected for study due to the elevated risk of overexposure among certain occupational groups and segments of the general population, which can result in irreversible neurotoxic effects. To improve the accuracy of DD neutron generator-based in vivo NAA (IVNAA) system, 12 human cadaver bone samples were analyzed. The system was evaluated, and good agreement was observed between its results and the conventional reactor-based NAA across six irradiated samples. The remaining samples, however, showed discrepancies-likely due to presence of residual soft tissue or the fact that some of the samples are not really bones. A major limitation in analyzing these samples was the lack of calcium (Ca) signals, which prevented Mn/Ca normalization, a critical step for correcting geometric and mass-related variations. These results emphasize the importance of proper sample preparation and verification when conducting ex vivo measurements with the laboratory system. In contrast, in vivo NAA is less affected by such inconsistencies due to a more consistent bone composition and hence the ability to normalize Mn levels to Ca. Overall, accurate application of NAA in environmental and health research requires careful consideration of sample integrity and appropriate normalization methods.
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.