Bedoukian   RussellIPM   RussellIPM   Piezoelectric Micro-Sprayer


Home
Animal Taxa
Plant Taxa
Semiochemicals
Floral Compounds
Semiochemical Detail
Semiochemicals & Taxa
Synthesis
Control
Invasive spp.
References

Abstract

Guide

Alphascents
Pherobio
InsectScience
E-Econex
Counterpart-Semiochemicals
Print
Email to a Friend
Kindly Donate for The Pherobase

« Previous AbstractOut of Thin Air: Microbial Utilization of Atmospheric Gaseous Organics in the Surface Ocean    Next AbstractWireless Sensor Network Combined with Cloud Computing for Air Quality Monitoring »

J Breath Res


Title:Review of linear and nonlinear models in breath analysis by Cyranose 320
Author(s):Arrieta M; Swanson B; Fogg L; Bhushan A;
Address:"Rush University, College of Nursing, Chicago, IL, United States of America. University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Applied Health Sciences, Chicago, IL, United States of America. Illinois Institute of Technology, College of Engineering, Chicago, IL, United States of America"
Journal Title:J Breath Res
Year:2023
Volume:20230526
Issue:3
Page Number: -
DOI: 10.1088/1752-7163/accf31
ISSN/ISBN:1752-7163 (Electronic) 1752-7155 (Linking)
Abstract:"Analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in breath specimens has potential for point of care (POC) screening due to ease of sample collection. While the electronic nose (e-nose) is a standard VOC measure across a wide range of industries, it has not been adopted for POC screening in healthcare. One limitation of the e-nose is the absence of mathematical models of data analysis that yield easily interpreted findings at POC. The purposes of this review were to (1) examine the sensitivity/specificity results from studies that analyzed breath smellprints using the Cyranose 320, a widely used commercial e-nose, and (2) determine whether linear or nonlinear mathematical models are superior for analyzing Cyranose 320 breath smellprints. This systematic review was conducted according to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses using keywords related to e-nose and breath. Twenty-two articles met the eligibility criteria. Two studies used a linear model while the rest used nonlinear models. The two studies that used a linear model had a smaller range for mean of sensitivity and higher mean (71.0%-96.0%;M= 83.5%) compared to the studies that used nonlinear models (46.9%-100%;M= 77.0%). Additionally, studies that used linear models had a smaller range for mean of specificity and higher mean (83.0%-91.5%;M= 87.2%) compared to studies that used nonlinear models (56.9%-94.0%;M= 76.9%). Linear models achieved smaller ranges for means of sensitivity and specificity compared to nonlinear models supporting additional investigations of their use for POC testing. Because our findings were derived from studies of heterogenous medical conditions, it is not known if they generalize to specific diagnoses"
Keywords:Humans *Nonlinear Dynamics Breath Tests/methods *Volatile Organic Compounds/analysis Sensitivity and Specificity Electronic Nose breath analysis linear models nonlinear models point of care screening sensitivity specificity;
Notes:"MedlineArrieta, Maryan Swanson, Barbara Fogg, Louis Bhushan, Abhinav eng Systematic Review England 2023/04/22 J Breath Res. 2023 May 26; 17(3). doi: 10.1088/1752-7163/accf31"

 
Back to top
 
Citation: El-Sayed AM 2024. The Pherobase: Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. <http://www.pherobase.com>.
© 2003-2024 The Pherobase - Extensive Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. Ashraf M. El-Sayed.
Page created on 17-11-2024