ArticleNanoscale advances2026
Determination of particle size and number concentrations in gold nanoparticle mixtures: an inter-method study using four analytical techniques (DLS, PTA, SEM and spICP-MS).
Article in Nanoscale advances, 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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study was conducted to determine the size of gold nanoparticles and their respective number concentrations in mono-, bi- and trimodal suspensions using dynamic light scattering (DLS), particle tracking analysis (PTA), scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and single particle inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (spICP-MS). This intercomparison approach aimed to test the various analysis methods for their suitability to characterise as well as to distinguish the different nanoparticle fractions in the samples. Thereby, the advantages and limitations of both the employed measurement techniques and the colloidal suspensions containing different concentrations of AuNPs became apparent. Here, DLS and PTA provided reasonably good data on the mean hydrodynamic diameter. In addition, PTA was able to determine the total amount of nanoparticles in all monomodal and in six out of eight multimodal suspensions. However, both methods failed to quantify the number of particles for each individual fraction. Using SEM, the mean sizes of the monomodal suspensions and the sizes of all individual fractions in the multimodal samples could be determined without difficulty. Furthermore, relative particle number ratios of the individual fractions could be obtained, even in the absence of data on the total particle concentration. Finally, despite having its own challenges regarding calibration, spICP-MS was the only method investigated capable of determining not only the mean diameter but also the particle concentration and simultaneously distinguishing and determining the individual fractions in all multimodal samples. This study demonstrated that experimental scenarios exist where individual methods reach their limits even by using well-defined gold nanoparticles of known sizes and concentrations. Therefore, various complementary methods are necessary for nanoparticle analysis to obtain the most comprehensive picture.
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.