Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42317239›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026

A lightweight intelligent model for VOC mixture analysis: toward preclinical breath biomarker analysis.

Xinzhe Fang, Chengyuan Zha, Weihua Fang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Xinzhe FangSchool of Pharmacy, Macau University of Science and Technology, Macau, China.
Chengyuan ZhaSchool of Artificial Intelligence and Automation, Hohai University, Nanjing, China.
Weihua FangNanjing Research Institute of Water Conservancy and Hydrology Automation, Ministry of Water Resources, Nanjing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For the current noninvasive lung cancer screening methods based on volatile organic compounds (VOCs) using electronic noses (e-noses), existing approaches still face limitations in modeling the long-range dependencies of sensor responses, the cross-channel global correlations, and the long-term trend features during the steady-state phase. Moreover, the associated deep learning models are often structurally complex and rely heavily on manual feature engineering, which restricts the engineering application and clinical translation of e-nose systems. To address these issues, this study proposes a lightweight global-local feature fusion framework for complex VOC sensing tasks and designs an efficient, lightweight feature extraction module (LFE) to achieve high-efficiency gas classification. For quantitative analysis of gas components, a GBDT-GRU Joint Prediction Model (JGPM) is introduced, effectively modeling the temporal evolution characteristics of sensor response signals. The above models were systematically validated using an e-nose experimental platform with synthetic gases of acetone, ethanol, isopropanol, and their mixtures at the ppm level as a proof-of-concept (PoC) study. The experimental results show that the proposed models outperform the comparative methods in both gas classification accuracy and concentration prediction performance, while maintaining low model complexity. Although current validation is at the preclinical stage, this framework provides a robust algorithmic foundation for future intelligent gas sensing and clinical breath-based disease screening.

Indexed as

cross-channel global correlationelectronic noselung cancermanual feature engineeringtemporal evolution characteristics

Identifiers

PMID42317239
PMCPMC13272304

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.