ArticleScientific data2026
A multiplatform chromatography-mass spectrometry dataset for targeted and suspect screening of pollutants.
Article in Scientific data, 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.
- A multiplatform chromatography-mass spectrometry dataset for targeted and suspect screening of pollutants.Scientific data · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Effective management of priority chemicals and emerging contaminants requires robust environmental contaminant analysis, including targeted analysis and suspect screening. In practice, critical workflow parameters are scattered across standards, vendor documentation, and the literature, which limits reuse and impedes method reconstruction. A key remaining gap is the lack of a source-linked, machine-readable resource that preserves chromatographic conditions, mass-spectrometric settings, detection-channel metadata, and record-level provenance across heterogeneous method documents. Here, we describe a curated, quality-rated environmental method-metadata dataset for LC-MS(/MS) and GC-MS(/MS), covering both MS1 full-scan and MS/MS acquisition contexts. By consolidating selected Chinese national, industry, and local standard methods, U.S. EPA methods, technical notes, and peer-reviewed publications, the dataset includes 7,010 LC-MS(/MS) and 3,000 GC-MS(/MS) method records, spanning analytes from volatile to polar and from thermally stable to thermally labile. The release separates provenance-preserving all-record tables from recommended-use ready subsets through explicit A/B/C/D quality ratings. The curation pipeline combines automated validation with manual auditing to normalize terminology and units across selected fields. In addition, elution gradients and oven temperature programs are encoded as JSON to enable programmatic parsing, integrity checks, and reusable data access. This dataset supports parameter retrieval and selection, facilitates confirmation of suspect lists, and enables reproducible cross-laboratory method comparison.
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.