| Title |
Assessment of simpler calibration models in the development and validation of a fast postmortem multi-analyte LC-QTOF quantitation method in whole blood with simultaneous screening capabilities using SWATH acquisition
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00216-017-0594-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marco P. Elmiger, Michael Poetzsch, Andrea E. Steuer, Thomas Kraemer |
| Abstract |
In postmortem toxicology, fast methods can provide a triage to avoid unnecessary autopsies. Usually, this requires multiple qualitative and quantitative analytical methods. The aim of the present study was to develop a postmortem LC-QTOF method for simultaneous screening and quantitation using easy sample preparation and reduced alternative calibration models. Hence, a method for 24 highly relevant substances in forensic toxicology was fully validated using the following calibration models: one-point external, one-point internal via corresponding deuterated standards, multi-point external daily calibration, and multi-point external weekly calibration. Two hundred microliters of postmortem blood were spiked with internal deuterated standard mixture and extracted by acetonitrile protein precipitation. Analysis was performed on a Sciex 6600 QTOF instrument with ESI+ mode using data-independent acquisition (DIA) namely sequential window acquisition of all theoretical mass spectra (SWATH). Validation of the different calibration models included selectivity, autosampler stability, recovery, matrix effects, accuracy, and precision for 24 substances. In addition, corresponding deuterated analogs of 52 substances were included to the internal standard mix for semi-quantitative concentration assessment. The simple protein precipitation provided recoveries higher than 55 and 75% for all analytes at low and high concentrations, respectively. Accuracy and precision criteria (bias and imprecision ± 15 and ± 20% near the limit of quantitation) were fulfilled by the different calibration models for most analytes. The validated method was successfully applied to more than 100 authentic postmortem samples and 3 proficiency tests. Furthermore, the one-point internal calibration via corresponding deuterated standard proved to be a considerably time saving technique for 76 analytes. Graphical abstract One-point and multi-point calibration and the resulting beta-tolerance intervals from method validation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 25% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 17% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 5 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 3 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 58% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 March 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#5,671
of 9,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,529
of 323,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#59
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,619 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,804 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 172 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.