ArticleFrontiers in chemistry2026
A novel digital identification strategy for licorice raw materials: TCM-ID with common/exclusive ion matrices and hierarchical matching.
Article 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Methods: In this study, an innovative method integrating liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) with the TCM digital identity (TCM-ID) concept was established for rapid and precise origin authentication of GUF and GIB. Common ion matrix (CIM) and exclusive ion matrix (EIM) of GUF and GIB were systematically constructed to calculate matching confidence (MC) and confidence increment rate (CIR), and a hierarchical matching strategy (HMS) was developed to improve identification accuracy. Meanwhile, the chemometric analysis was adopted to screen differential chemical markers. Results: The results demonstrated that GUF and GIB could be rapidly and specifically distinguished with thresholds of MC ≥ 70% and CIR ≥ 6.00. Compared to CIM, the EIM exhibited better species specificity, and chemometric analysis identified seven differential markers: Licoricidin, Licoricone, and Glycycoumarin for GUF, and Licochalcone A, Licochalcone B, Echinatin, and Glabrol for GIB. Discussion: This study provides a novel and feasible approach for botanical origin identification of GUF and GIB, demonstrating that the TCM-ID strategy is a promising method for origin traceability and quality evaluation of GUF and GIB.
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.