ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Updated Guidance for Communicating PFAS Identification Confidence with Ion Mobility Spectrometry.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Over the last decade, global contamination from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) has become apparent due to their detection in countless matrices worldwide, from consumer products to human blood to drinking water. As researchers implement non-targeted analyses (NTA) to more fully understand the PFAS present in the environment and human bodies, clear guidance is needed for consistent and objective reporting of the identified molecules. Confidence levels for small molecules analyzed and identified with high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) have existed since 2014; however, unification of currently-used levels and improved guidance for their application is needed due to inconsistencies in reporting and continuing innovations in analytical methods. Here, we (i) investigate current practices for confidence level reporting of PFAS identified with liquid chromatography (LC), gas chromatography (GC), and/or ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) coupled with HRMS and (ii) propose a simple, unified confidence level guidance that incorporates both PFAS-specific attributes and IMS collision cross section (CCS) values.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.