Cited by 146Analytical chemistry methods developmentInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques InnovationAnalytical Chemistry and Chromatography

Selecting an extraction solvent for a greener liquid phase microextraction (LPME) mode-based analytical method

Kokosa, John M.·2019·TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.trac.2019.05.012

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kokosa, J. M.
Affiliations
Mott Community College (US)
Corresponding author
Kokosa, John M.
Venue
TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-09
Volume
118
Pages
238-247
ISSN
0165-9936 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2946693062
Cited by
145
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 4
FWCI
8.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical chemistry methods development
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Innovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques Innovation
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Analytical Chemistry and Chromatography
Keywords
liquid-phase microextraction, solvent selection, green analytical chemistry, single-drop microextraction, hollow fiber liquid phase microextraction, dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review