MétaCan
Menu
Cohort builder

4,299,418 works, Canadian by any of four routes.

Every filter state is a URL; the URL is the query; the query is citable via /q/⟨hash⟩. The page, the API and the export parse the same parameters.

The current cohort, streamed from the database: every work column, the machine labels, the provisional scores, and the per-row validation status. Exports are capped at 100,000 rows. Mints a permanent /q/ link for this exact query. The same filters always produce the same link, whoever asks.

Search term
Author
Year range
Sort
Language
Type
Field
Venue
Topic
Analytical chemistry methods development
Retraction
Abstract
Evidence source
Study design
Label agreement
Label status

Direct Codex and Gemma labels are unvalidated and sparse. Distilled predictions cover the full frame and are also unvalidated. Choose the evidence source explicitly; absence of a direct label is never a negative label.

affaffiliation
fundfunder
venuejournal
aboutaboutness

The four routes compose: require the funder route and exclude affiliation to get the funder-only stratum no affiliation-based frame ever sees.

1,254 results · 1 filter active ·
Results by year
20002025
Publication date
Categories
Machine labels · sparse coverage
Evidence
Language
Type
Citations
An unlabeled work is unknown, not a negative. Label coverage is reported on every query.
1,254 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 1 of 26

Labels cover 3 of 1,254 works in this cohort. The rest are unlabeled, which is not a negative label: the label table is sparse today and grows as labeling rounds land.

Distilled predictions cover 1,254 of 1,254 works in this cohort. Predictions are machine_predicted_unvalidated. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work (title-only); the Codex side is a distilled, calibrated classifier. Candidate is the union; consensus is the intersection.

affno abstractunlabeled
Microextraction of drugs
Heather Lord, Janusz Pawliszyn
2000· review· en· Journal of Chromatography A· Chemistry
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
470
citations
afffundunlabeled
Thin-Film Microextraction
Inge Bruheim, Xiaochuan Liu, Janusz Pawliszyn
2003· article· en· Analytical Chemistry· Chemistry
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
462
citations
affunlabeled
Recent developments in solid-phase microextraction
Sanja Risticevic, Vadoud Niri, Dajana Vuckovic, Janusz Pawliszyn
2008· review· en· Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry· Chemistry
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
373
citations
affunlabeled
Theory of Solid-Phase Microextraction
Janusz Pawliszyn
2000· article· en· Journal of Chromatographic Science· Chemistry
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
315
citations
afffundno abstractunlabeled
Passive sampling in environmental analysis
Suresh Seethapathy, Tadeusz Górecki, Xiaojing Li
2007· review· en· Journal of Chromatography A· Chemistry
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
307
citations
affunlabeled
Sample Preparation:  Quo Vadis?
Janusz Pawliszyn
2003· article· en· Analytical Chemistry· Chemistry
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
283
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
SPME in environmental analysis
Gangfeng Ouyang, Janusz Pawliszyn
2006· article· en· Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry· Chemistry
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
267
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
SPME – Quo vadis?
Barbara Bojko, Erasmus Cudjoe, Germán Augusto Gómez‐Ríos, Krzysztof Goryński, Ruifen Jiang, Nathaly Reyes‐Garcés +5 more
2012· article· en· Analytica Chimica Acta· Chemistry
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
172
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
Glow discharge mass spectrometry
Volker Hoffmann, Martin Kasik, Peter Robinson, Cornel Venzago
2004· article· en· Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry· Chemistry
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
140
citations

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About