ReviewFrontiers in chemistry2026
Green metrics in chalcone synthesis via Claisen-Schmidt condensation: a critical mini review.
Review in Frontiers in 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chalcones are important scaffolds in medicinal chemistry and functional materials, commonly synthesized via the Claisen-Schmidt condensation. In recent years, numerous methodologies have been proposed to improve the sustainability of this transformation, including solvent-free conditions, heterogeneous catalysis, alternative solvents, and process-intensification strategies. However, the lack of standardized and quantitative assessment often limits meaningful comparison between reported approaches. This mini review critically examines recent advances in sustainable Claisen-Schmidt condensations through the lens of green chemistry metrics, with particular emphasis on reaction mass efficiency, process mass intensity, E-factor, and specific energy consumption as complementary descriptors of process performance. By analyzing representative methodologies under comparable criteria, the review highlights inconsistencies in reporting practices and identifies key parameters that influence the overall environmental footprint of the process. Beyond summarizing current strategies, the article discusses methodological limitations, common sources of bias in metric evaluation, and ongoing debates regarding the actual sustainability of widely adopted approaches. Finally, perspectives are provided on the need for standardized reporting protocols, broader integration of energy-related metrics, and the adoption of data-driven and life cycle-oriented frameworks to enable more reliable benchmarking and the rational design of greener synthetic routes to bioactive chalcones.
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.