ArticleAnalytical chemistry2026
AI-Driven Data Extraction and AGREE-Based Greenness Evaluation of Analytical Methods for Natural Products: Insights from Selected Studies.
Article in Analytical chemistry, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have evolved into versatile tools of the 21st century, simplifying repetitive and labor-intensive tasks in everyday life. Here, we aimed to test the feasibility of using different LLMs to assess the greenness of analytical procedures according to the "Analytical GREEnness Metric Approach" (AGREE) by extracting specific data corresponding to the 12 principles of green analytical chemistry from scientific articles. Seven open-access articles on plant natural products using different analytical techniques were evaluated with the five most popular artificial intelligence (AI) tools (ChatGPT, Copilot, Perplexity, Claude, and Gemini), which were tasked to obtain specific data, along with a justification for the selection of this data. Additionally, different versions (basic and advanced) of the same tool (Perplexity and Perplexity Pro), output types (PDF file and link to the online version), and repeatability (three times the same task) were compared. All extracted data were used to calculate AGREE scores, and the final results were compared with those obtained by experts. AI tools were able to assess greenness with a high degree of accuracy, similar to that of trained researchers. Furthermore, a verification/comparison study demonstrated the possibility of critically examining the greenness assessment of developed methods to facilitate standardizing greenness evaluation. The final application of advanced AI tools dedicated to scientific research confirmed the greenness scores, indicating high consistency between all considered evaluation 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.