ArticleFrontiers in chemistry2026
Metal element fingerprints combined with chemometrics deciphering the discrimination of different Calculus bovis and a novel risk-benefit assessment.
Article in Frontiers in chemistry, 2026. 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.
- Comparative Elemental Profiling and Differentiation Analysis ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, the phenomenon of adulterated Calculus bovis being sold as cheap Calculus bovis has been continuously observed in the market. To effectively differentiate among the three products, original Calculus bovis, Bovis calculus sativus, and Bovis calculus artifactus, our group analyzed and evaluated the elements present in these products that are relevant to the therapeutic efficacy of traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs). The elements were evaluated using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) combined with chemometric analysis to differentiate among the abovementioned three marketed products. Chemometric analysis showed that Calculus bovis samples could be well separated based on established multi-element fingerprints, with Sr, Ca, K, V, Ti, and Al identified as the most important variables for discrimination. When Calculus bovis is medicinally used or consumed, non-carcinogenic risk assessment results indicate that the risks associated with exposure to heavy metals such as Pb, Cd, As, and Hg were acceptable for both genders. However, the hazard index (HI) of Pb in Calculus bovis exceeded 1. The results of the carcinogenicity risk assessment indicated that the carcinogenicity risk (CR) of Pb and As in all Calculus bovis samples was less than 1, indicating that the risks were acceptable. For the nutrients K, Ca, and Mg, the combined risk-benefit evaluation of the three Calculus bovis products indicated that the HI exceeded 1 across all three products, regardless of the gender of the individual consuming the medication. The benefit index (BI) for K, Mg, Cr, Se, and Mo was less than 1, indicating that risks need further consideration. The identification model developed in this study can effectively differentiate between the three marketed Calculus bovis products, aiming to address quality issues such as adulteration, forgery, under-injection, and other such concerns.
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.