MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403528790 · doi:10.1016/j.jpba.2024.116536

Advanced design of chemically modified electrodes for the electrochemical analysis of uric acid and xanthine

2024· review· en· W4403528790 on OpenAlexaff
Abdelaziz Moutcine, Charaf Laghlimi, Younes Ziat, Soumia El Bahraoui, Hamza Belkhanchi, Ahmed Jouaiti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrochemical sensors and biosensors
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryXanthineUric acidElectrochemistryElectrodeCombinatorial chemistryOrganic chemistryBiochemistryEnzymePhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study reviews advances in chemical detection methods applied to the metabolic products known as uric acid (UA) and xanthine (XA), which are residues of purine metabolism, with XA being an important intermediate preceding UA. UA and XA play crucial roles in maintaining physiological homeostasis in organisms. Chemical modification of electrodes is a widely used method to address the issues of poor sensitivity and selectivity encountered with bare electrodes. This article reviews various materials commonly used to modify electrode surfaces for the detection of uric acid and xanthine, focusing on properties that enhance electrocatalytic activity. We highlight recent trends in detecting these compounds using electrochemical methods with microfabricated devices and explore cutting-edge modification techniques involving novel nanomaterials, carbon derivatives, metallic nanoparticles, and polymers. The review includes a comparative analysis of these materials, addressing their strengths, limitations, and recent advancements, such as in carbon-based materials and metal-organic frameworks (MOFs). Finally, we critically examine the challenges and future prospects of electrochemical detection of UA and XA in real samples, offering strategies to address these issues. The challenges associated with determination of UA and XA in real samples are also discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical AnalysisSame topicElectrochemical sensors and biosensorsFrench-language works237,207