Validating Greenness Scores in Pharmaceutical Analysis: A Cross-Tool Strategy for Robust Method Assessment

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive framework for researchers and drug development professionals to validate and compare greenness scores across multiple assessment tools. It explores the foundational principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) and introduces key metrics like AGREE, GAPI, and the Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS). Through methodological applications and case studies from recent pharmaceutical research, it demonstrates practical implementation. The content addresses common troubleshooting scenarios and optimization strategies, culminating in a systematic approach for the comparative validation of greenness profiles to ensure reliable, sustainable, and compliant analytical methods in biomedical research.

The Principles and Proliferation of Greenness Assessment Tools

Foundations and Principles of Green Analytical Chemistry

Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) emerged in the year 2000 as a specialized area within green chemistry, focused on making laboratory practices more environmentally friendly [1]. It serves as a stimulant for the progress of analytical chemistry, aiming to reach a compromise between the increasing quality of results and improving the environmental friendliness of analytical methods [1].

The core framework for GAC consists of 12 principles that were developed by revising the original 12 principles of green chemistry, which were found to be inadequate for analytical chemistry. The 12 principles of GAC provide a comprehensive guideline for implementing sustainable practices in analytical laboratories [1] [2]. These principles can be conveniently remembered using the SIGNIFICANCE mnemonic [1] [2]:

• S - Select direct analytical techniques to avoid sample treatment
• I - Integrate analytical processes and operations
• G - Generate minimal waste and manage it properly
• N - Perform in-situ measurements
• I - Minimize the number of samples and sample size
• F - Avoid derivatization
• I - Implement automated and miniaturized methods
• C - Choose safe solvents and reagents
• A - Prioritize personal safety
• N - Reduce energy consumption
• C - Eliminate or replace toxic reagents
• E - Apply multi-analyte determinations for increased throughput

The four key goals to be achieved in greening analytical methods are: (1) elimination or reduction of the use of chemical substances; (2) minimization of energy consumption; (3) proper management of analytical waste; and (4) increased safety for the operator [1].

The diagram above illustrates the 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry and their alignment with the four key goals of greening analytical methods, showing how each principle contributes to the overarching objectives of GAC.

Greenness Assessment Metrics and Tools

The evaluation of analytical methods' environmental impact is crucial for adhering to sustainability goals. Multiple greenness assessment tools have been developed, each with unique characteristics, advantages, and limitations [2] [3]. These tools help chemists determine whether an analytical procedure can be considered "green" and facilitate comparisons between different methods.

Evolution of Greenness Assessment Metrics

The field of GAC has witnessed significant evolution in assessment metrics, progressing from basic tools to more comprehensive and sophisticated evaluation systems [3]. The development timeline includes:

• Early Metrics (2002-2012): NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index) and Analytical Eco-Scale were among the pioneering tools, providing basic qualitative or semi-quantitative assessments [2] [3].
• Comprehensive Frameworks (2015-2019): GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index) and AGREE (Analytical GREEnness) metrics established more comprehensive frameworks offering visual and quantitative evaluations of entire analytical workflows [2] [3].
• Recent Advancements (2020-2025): Tools such as AGREEprep, Modified GAPI, Carbon Footprint Reduction Index, and Analytical Green Star Analysis have further refined assessments by addressing specific stages and incorporating lifecycle impacts [3].

Key GAC Assessment Tools and Their Characteristics

Table 1: Comparison of Major Green Analytical Chemistry Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Year	Assessment Basis	Output Format	Key Parameters	Strengths	Limitations
NEMI [2] [3]	2002	4 environmental criteria	Pictogram (4 quadrants)	PBT chemicals, hazardous waste, pH, waste amount (<50g)	Simple, immediate visual information	Qualitative only, limited scope
Analytical Eco-Scale [2] [3]	2012	Penalty points from ideal score (100)	Numerical score (0-100)	Reagent hazards, amount, energy, waste	Quantitative, enables direct comparison	Lacks visual component, subjective penalties
GAPI [2] [3]	2015	Entire analytical process	5-section color pictogram	Sample collection, preparation, transportation, reception, detection	Comprehensive, visual identification of impact areas	No overall score, somewhat subjective coloring
AGREE [2] [3]	2020	12 GAC principles	Pictogram + numerical score (0-1)	All 12 GAC principles	Comprehensive, user-friendly, facilitates comparison	Subjective weighting, limited pre-analytical coverage
AGREEprep [3]	2021	Sample preparation focus	Pictogram + numerical score (0-1)	Solvent use, energy consumption, hazardous reagents	Specialized for sample preparation	Must be used with broader tools for full method evaluation
AGSA [3]	2025	Multiple green criteria	Star diagram + numerical score	Reagent toxicity, waste, energy, solvent consumption	Intuitive visualization, integrated scoring	Newer tool with limited track record

Assessment Tool Methodologies and Experimental Protocols

The protocols for applying these assessment tools involve systematic evaluation of analytical methods against specific criteria. The methodology typically includes:

1. NEMI Assessment Protocol [2]:

• Step 1: Check if chemicals are on PBT (Persistent, Bioaccumulative, Toxic) list
• Step 2: Verify no solvents are on D, F, P, U hazardous wastes lists
• Step 3: Ensure method pH remains between 2-12
• Step 4: Confirm waste generation is ≤50g per analysis
• Outcome: Each met criterion fills one quadrant of the NEMI pictogram

2. Analytical Eco-Scale Protocol [2] [3]:

• Step 1: Start with base score of 100 (ideal green analysis)
• Step 2: Subtract penalty points for hazardous reagents (amount and hazard level)
• Step 3: Subtract penalty points for energy consumption (>0.1 kWh per sample)
• Step 4: Subtract penalty points for waste generation
• Outcome: Score >75 represents excellent green analysis; 50-75 acceptable green analysis

3. AGREE Assessment Protocol [2] [3]:

• Step 1: Evaluate method against 12 GAC principles (0-1 scoring per principle)
• Step 2: Apply weighting factors based on relative importance
• Step 3: Calculate overall score using algorithmic calculator
• Step 4: Generate circular pictogram with color-coded sections
• Outcome: Comprehensive score (0-1) with visual representation of strengths/weaknesses

The workflow above outlines the general process for evaluating the greenness of analytical methods using GAC assessment tools, from initial method selection to final validation of greenness scores.

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Scores Across Multiple Tools

Validating greenness scores across multiple assessment tools is essential for obtaining a reliable and comprehensive understanding of a method's environmental impact. Different tools may yield varying results due to their distinct structures, evaluation criteria, and weighting systems [4] [3].

Case Study: SULLME Method Evaluation

A case study evaluating a sugaring-out liquid-liquid microextraction (SULLME) method for determining antiviral compounds demonstrates how complementary tools provide a multidimensional sustainability view [3]:

Table 2: Comparative Greenness Scores for SULLME Method Across Multiple Tools

Assessment Tool	Score	Key Strengths	Key Limitations
MoGAPI	60/100	Green solvents, microextraction (<10 mL solvent)	Specific storage needs, moderately toxic substances, >10 mL waste
AGREE	56/100	Miniaturization, semi-automation, no derivatization, small sample volume (1 mL)	Toxic/flamable solvents, low throughput (2 samples/hour)
AGSA	58.33/100	Semi-miniaturization, avoided derivatization	Manual handling, multiple pretreatment steps, 6+ hazard pictograms
CaFRI	60/100	Low energy (0.1-1.5 kWh/sample), no energy-intensive equipment	No renewable energy, no CO₂ tracking, long-distance transportation

This multidimensional evaluation reveals that while the SULLME method demonstrates strengths in miniaturization and solvent reduction, it shows consistent weaknesses in waste management, reagent safety, and energy sourcing across multiple assessment tools [3].

Good Evaluation Practices (GEP) for Greenness Assessment

To ensure reliable and scientifically valid assessments, researchers should follow five general rules of Good Evaluation Practice (GEP) [4]:

• Use quantitative indicators based on empirical data combined with models of varied structures to compensate for individual tool limitations
• Ensure proper context by comparing methods with similar analytical capabilities and applications
• Apply consistent assessment criteria across all compared methods to maintain fairness
• Acknowledge and document uncertainties and assumptions made during the evaluation process
• Maintain transparency by providing detailed methodology and raw data to support assessment conclusions

These practices help reduce confusion, improve research quality, and facilitate information exchange between authors and readers [4].

Implementation in Pharmaceutical and Analytical Laboratories

Practical Applications and Research Reagent Solutions

Implementing GAC principles requires specific reagents, solvents, and materials that align with sustainability goals while maintaining analytical performance.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Chemistry

Reagent/Material	Traditional Substance	Function	Green Alternative
Extraction Solvents	Chloroform, hexane, dichloromethane	Sample preparation, extraction	Bio-based solvents, ionic liquids, water, supercritical CO₂ [5]
Chromatographic Mobile Phases	Acetonitrile, methanol with modifiers	HPLC/UPLC separation	Ethanol, water, acetone [5]
Extraction Phases	Liquid solvents, synthetic polymers	Sample concentration, cleanup	Solid-phase microextraction (SPME) fibers, molecularly imprinted polymers [5]
Derivatization Agents	Toxic catalysts (e.g., pyridine)	Analyte functionalization for detection	Direct analysis techniques to avoid derivatization [1]
Energy Sources	Grid electricity (fossil fuels)	Instrument operation	Renewable energy, instrument sharing, optimized protocols [3]

Strategic Approaches for Greening Analytical Methods

Laboratories can adopt several strategic approaches to implement GAC principles effectively:

• Miniaturization: Reduce sample volumes from milliliters to microliters and scale down equipment using microfluidic devices and lab-on-a-chip technologies [1] [5]
• Alternative Solvents: Replace hazardous solvents with safer alternatives such as water, ethanol, bio-based solvents, or ionic liquids [1] [5]
• Method Integration: Combine multiple analytical steps into single, continuous workflows to reduce resource consumption and analysis time [1] [6]
• Automation and High-Throughput: Implement automated systems and parallel processing to increase efficiency while reducing solvent consumption and operator exposure [1] [6]
• Direct Analysis Techniques: Apply methods that require minimal or no sample preparation, such as certain spectroscopic techniques [1]

Challenges in Pharmaceutical Method Validation

The pharmaceutical industry faces specific challenges in implementing GAC principles, particularly regarding regulatory compliance and method validation:

• Standard Method Updates: Recent evaluation of 174 standard methods from CEN, ISO, and Pharmacopoeias revealed that 67% scored below 0.2 on the AGREEprep scale (where 1 is the highest), highlighting the urgent need to update resource-intensive official methods [6]
• Validation Requirements: New green methods must demonstrate comparable accuracy, precision, sensitivity, and specificity to established traditional methods, requiring comprehensive validation protocols [5]
• Regulatory Acceptance: Transition to greener alternatives depends on regulatory agencies establishing clear timelines for phasing out poorly performing methods and providing technical guidance for adoption [6]

Green Analytical Chemistry represents a fundamental shift in how analytical methods are designed, implemented, and evaluated. The 12 principles of GAC provide a comprehensive framework for reducing the environmental impact of analytical activities while maintaining or improving analytical performance. The development of multiple assessment tools—from early basic metrics to current comprehensive frameworks—enables researchers to quantitatively evaluate and compare the greenness of analytical methods. The consistent application of Good Evaluation Practices and validation across multiple tools is essential for obtaining reliable assessments of method greenness. For drug development professionals and researchers, adopting GAC principles offers the dual benefit of reducing environmental impact while potentially improving efficiency, safety, and cost-effectiveness. As regulatory agencies increasingly focus on sustainability, familiarity with GAC principles and assessment tools will become essential for maintaining competitiveness and compliance in the pharmaceutical and analytical sciences.

The field of analytical chemistry has undergone a significant paradigm shift over the past quarter-century, moving from a singular focus on analytical performance to a more holistic view that incorporates environmental impact and practical applicability. The concept of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), formalized through the 12 Principles of GAC, initially provided the foundation for evaluating the environmental footprint of analytical methods [7]. This was a crucial development given the ubiquity of analysis processes in environmental and medical laboratories, food analysis, forensic examinations, quality control, and countless other areas [8]. However, as the field matured, it became evident that assessing environmental impact alone was insufficient for method selection and optimization.

The recognition that greenness represents just one dimension of method evaluation led to the emergence of more comprehensive frameworks. The White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) concept, introduced in 2021, represents the current state of this evolution by proposing a balanced assessment across three primary attributes: red (analytical performance), green (environmental impact), and blue (practicality and economy) [8]. According to WAC principles, a "whiter" method achieves an optimal compromise between all three attributes, making it better suited for its intended application. This conceptual expansion has driven the development of specialized metrics that allow researchers to evaluate methods with unprecedented granularity, creating a sophisticated toolkit for modern analytical chemists, particularly those in pharmaceutical development where both sustainability and performance are critical.

The Historical Trajectory of Assessment Tools

The Foundation: Green Analytical Chemistry Metrics

The earliest green chemistry metrics focused primarily on environmental and safety concerns, establishing a baseline for evaluating the ecological footprint of analytical procedures. These tools emerged from the foundational recognition that while a single chemical analysis might have minimal environmental impact, the cumulative effect of ubiquitous analytical processes is substantial [8]. Initial metrics were relatively simple, focusing on basic environmental parameters, but have since evolved into sophisticated assessment systems.

Table 1: Evolution of Primary Green Analytical Chemistry Metrics

Metric Name	Primary Focus	Assessment Mechanism	Key Limitations
National Environmental Method Index (NEMI) [7] [8]	Basic environmental impact	Pictogram with four quadrants indicating hazardous chemical use, corrosiveness, waste generation, and persistence	Limited scope; binary assessment (pass/fail) without gradation
Analytical Eco-Scale [7] [8]	Penalty-based environmental assessment	Assigns penalty points for hazardous procedures; higher score indicates greener method	Does not comprehensively address functional method characteristics
Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) [7] [8]	Comprehensive environmental impact	Multi-level pictogram with color coding (green to red) for multiple assessment criteria	Complex assessment process; focuses solely on environmental aspects
Analytical GREEnness metric (AGREE) [7] [8]	Holistic greenness evaluation	Uses 12 principles of GAC with circular pictogram and quantitative score (0-1)	Does not incorporate practical or performance considerations
Analytical GREEnness metric for sample preparation (AGREEprep) [7] [8]	Sample preparation-specific environmental impact	Focuses specifically on sample preparation steps using 10 assessment criteria	Narrow focus on only one phase of analytical process

The Paradigm Shift: White Analytical Chemistry and the RGB Model

The introduction of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) in 2021 marked a significant evolution in assessment methodology [8]. By adapting the red-green-blue (RGB) color model from electronics—where white light results from combining three primary colors—WAC provided a conceptual framework for balancing three critical dimensions: analytical performance (red), environmental impact (green), and practical applicability (blue) [8]. This framework acknowledged that the "greenest" method might not be practically viable if it lacks sufficient analytical performance or is too cumbersome for routine use.

Several implementations of the RGB model have been developed, with varying levels of sophistication. The basic RGB12 algorithm assesses four criteria each for red, green, and blue attributes [8]. RGBfast demonstrates a higher degree of automation and objectivity by limiting analytical performance assessment to three key parameters: trueness, precision, and limit of detection (LOD) [8]. This evolution toward simplified, more automated assessment tools reflects the growing demand for practical, user-friendly metrics that can be readily integrated into method development workflows without requiring extensive expert judgment.

Specialized Metrics: BAGI and RAPI

The most recent development in this evolutionary trajectory is the creation of specialized, focused metrics that provide detailed assessment of specific dimensions. The Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI), dedicated to practicality and economic factors ("blue" criteria), employs open-source software to evaluate 10 practicality criteria, visualizing results through a star-shaped pictogram with color intensity from white (poor) to dark blue (excellent) and a quantitative score (25-100) [8].

Complementing BAGI, the newly introduced Red Analytical Performance Index (RAPI) addresses the analytical performance dimension ("red" criteria) [8]. Also employing open-source software, RAPI evaluates 10 key analytical parameters guided by ICH validation recommendations and good laboratory practice [8]. Its assessment produces a star-like pictogram with color intensity from white to dark red, providing both visual and quantitative (0-100) evaluation of methodological performance [8]. This specialization allows for more granular assessment than previously possible with broader RGB models, which typically included only 3-4 analytical parameters [8].

Diagram 1: The evolutionary pathway from early Green Analytical Chemistry metrics to specialized assessment tools, showing how evaluation frameworks have expanded from singular environmental focus to comprehensive multi-dimensional assessment.

Comparative Analysis of Modern Assessment Metrics

Comprehensive Metric Comparison

The current landscape of analytical assessment metrics offers researchers multiple tools with complementary strengths. The following table provides a detailed comparison of the most relevant contemporary metrics, highlighting their specific focuses, assessment mechanisms, and optimal use cases.

Table 2: Comprehensive Comparison of Modern Analytical Assessment Metrics

Metric	Assessment Focus	Criteria Evaluated	Output Format	Quantitative Score	Primary Application Context
NEMI [7] [8]	Environmental impact	4 criteria: hazardous chemicals, corrosiveness, waste, persistence	Pictogram with 4 quadrants	No (binary pass/fail)	Initial environmental screening
Analytical Eco-Scale [7] [8]	Environmental safety	Penalty points for hazardous procedures	Numerical score	Yes (higher = greener)	Comparative greenness assessment
GAPI [7] [8]	Comprehensive environmental impact	Multiple criteria across analytical process	Multi-colored pictogram	No (color-coded)	Detailed environmental impact assessment
AGREE [7] [8]	Alignment with 12 GAC principles	12 evaluation criteria	Circular pictogram with score	Yes (0-1 scale)	Holistic greenness evaluation
RGB Model [8]	Balanced performance across three domains	Varies by implementation (typically 3-4 per domain)	Color-coded diagram	Varies by implementation	Holistic method comparison and selection
BAGI [8]	Practicality and economic factors	10 practicality criteria	Star pictogram (white to dark blue)	Yes (25-100 scale)	Practical applicability assessment
RAPI [8]	Analytical performance parameters	10 validation parameters	Star pictogram (white to dark red)	Yes (0-100 scale)	Analytical performance evaluation

Methodological Framework for Comparative Assessment

To ensure consistent and reproducible evaluation of analytical methods across different metrics, researchers should follow a standardized experimental protocol. The following workflow provides a systematic approach for comprehensive method assessment:

Sample Preparation and Method Application:

• Select representative analytical methods for comparison (e.g., HPLC, GC, spectrophotometry)
• Apply each method to appropriate reference materials and samples
• Document all procedural details including reagents, equipment, and environmental conditions

Data Collection Protocol:

• Record all analytical performance data (precision, accuracy, LOD, LOQ, etc.)
• Document consumption of all materials, energy, and reagents
• Track waste generation and disposal methods
• Record time requirements for each procedural step

Assessment Implementation:

• Input collected data into each metric's assessment framework
• For software-based tools (RAPI, BAGI), use the provided open-source platforms
• For pictogram-based tools (GAPI, NEMI), follow published guidelines for criteria evaluation
• Generate comparative outputs for all metrics applied to each method

Validation and Interpretation:

• Compare metric outputs for consistency and complementary information
• Identify trade-offs between greenness, performance, and practicality
• Contextualize results within specific application requirements
• Document limitations and potential biases in assessment

This methodological framework ensures that comparative assessments are conducted systematically, allowing for valid comparisons between different analytical methods and facilitating the selection of optimal methods for specific applications.

Case Studies and Experimental Validation

Pharmaceutical Industry Implementation

The pharmaceutical industry has emerged as a primary adopter of advanced assessment metrics, driven by both regulatory requirements and sustainability initiatives. A notable example is the collaboration between Merck and Sunthetics, which received the 2025 ACS Green Chemistry Award for their work on Algorithmic Process Optimization (APO) [9]. This approach integrates Bayesian Optimization and active learning into pharmaceutical process development, creating greener, more efficient experimentation frameworks [9].

The APO platform exemplifies the practical implementation of advanced assessment principles, enabling researchers to:

• Reduce hazardous reagents and material waste through optimized experimental design [9]
• Accelerate development timelines via machine-learning-guided iteration [9]
• Solve multi-objective optimization problems that balance greenness, performance, and practicality [9]
• Generate high-quality insights with fewer experiments, reducing both time and environmental impact [9]

This case study demonstrates how the principles underlying assessment metrics are being operationalized through advanced computational approaches, moving from retrospective evaluation to prospective optimization of analytical methods.

Comparative Method Assessment Using Multiple Metrics

Recent research has demonstrated the value of applying multiple complementary metrics to obtain a comprehensive understanding of method characteristics. In a representative study comparing various analytical techniques, the simultaneous application of RAPI, BAGI, and AGREE provided insights that would be missed using any single metric alone [8].

The experimental protocol for such comparative assessments typically involves:

• Selecting a diverse set of analytical methods with different environmental and performance characteristics
• Applying each assessment metric according to its standardized procedure
• Generating both quantitative scores and visual representations for each method-metric combination
• Analyzing concordance and discordance between different metric outputs

Results from such studies consistently show that methods ranking highly on one dimension may perform poorly on others, highlighting the importance of multi-dimensional assessment. For example, a method might show excellent greenness scores but poor practicality (high AGREE but low BAGI), or strong analytical performance with unacceptable environmental impact (high RAPI but low AGREE) [8]. These trade-offs underscore why the integrated perspective offered by the WAC framework is essential for informed method selection.

Table 3: Essential Digital Tools for Analytical Method Assessment

Tool Name	Access Platform	Primary Function	Key Features
RAPI Software [8]	https://mostwiedzy.pl/rapi	Red Analytical Performance Index assessment	Open-source Python-based, evaluates 10 analytical parameters, generates star pictogram
BAGI Software [8]	https://mostwiedzy.pl/bagi	Blue Applicability Grade Index assessment	Open-source, automated scoring of 10 practicality criteria, blue intensity scale
Colorblindly [10]	Chrome browser extension	Color blindness simulation	Simulates various color vision deficiencies for accessibility testing
Coblis [10]	Online simulator	Color blindness image checker	Upload images to preview appearance for different color vision deficiencies
Chromatic Vision Simulator [10]	Mobile app (iOS/Android)	Real-time color blindness simulation	Uses device camera for real-time color deficiency simulation

Accessible Visualization Practices

Effective communication of assessment results requires attention to visual accessibility. With approximately 8% of males and 0.5% of females affected by red-green color vision deficiency [10], the default color schemes of many assessment pictograms present accessibility challenges. Research-supported strategies to enhance accessibility include:

Color Palette Selection:

• Use color-blind-friendly palettes that vary in lightness and saturation as well as hue [10]
• Avoid problematic color combinations, particularly red-green contrasts [10]
• Implement mathematically optimized palettes, such as the eight-color set developed by Wong (2011) that provides good differentiability for individuals with red-green color blindness [10]

Multi-Modal Communication:

• Supplement color coding with patterns, textures, or symbols [10]
• Use text labels to reinforce color-based distinctions [10]
• Employ varying darkness levels in addition to hue differentiations [11]

Diagram 2: Integrated methodological assessment workflow showing how data from analytical methods flows through specialized assessment metrics to inform final method selection decisions.

Emerging Trends and Development Pathways

The evolution of analytical assessment metrics continues with several promising development pathways emerging. Current research indicates several directions for future advancement:

Integration of Artificial Intelligence:

• Machine learning algorithms for automated method optimization and assessment [9]
• Bayesian optimization approaches for multi-objective balancing of greenness, performance, and practicality [9]
• Predictive modeling of method characteristics based on molecular structures and procedural parameters

Methodology Expansion:

• Development of domain-specific assessment criteria for specialized applications (e.g., bioanalysis, environmental monitoring)
• Integration of life-cycle assessment (LCA) principles into analytical method evaluation
• Expansion of assessment boundaries to include equipment manufacturing and disposal phases

Automation and Standardization:

• Development of standardized application programming interfaces (APIs) for metric calculation
• Automated data extraction from analytical instrument software
• Implementation of assessment tools within electronic laboratory notebooks (ELNs)

These developments point toward a future where assessment metrics are seamlessly integrated into analytical method development workflows, providing real-time feedback on environmental, performance, and practical characteristics throughout the method design process.

The historical evolution from Green Analytical Chemistry to specialized analytical metrics represents a maturation of the field's approach to method evaluation and selection. The progression from singular environmental focus to the comprehensive White Analytical Chemistry framework, and finally to specialized tools like RAPI and BAGI, demonstrates an increasingly sophisticated understanding of the multi-dimensional nature of analytical method optimization.

For researchers and drug development professionals, this expanded toolkit enables more informed decision-making that balances the often-competing demands of analytical performance, environmental impact, and practical applicability. By applying these complementary metrics throughout method development and validation, scientists can select and optimize methods that not only provide reliable analytical data but also minimize environmental impact and maximize practical utility.

The continuing evolution of assessment metrics—particularly through integration with machine learning and automation platforms—promises to further transform analytical method development from an art to a science, where sustainability and performance are optimized simultaneously rather than traded off against each other. This represents not just a technical advancement but a fundamental shift in how the analytical chemistry community conceptualizes method quality and suitability.

The growing awareness of environmental sustainability has propelled Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) to the forefront of chemical research. GAC represents an environmentally conscious methodology whose objective is to mitigate the detrimental effects of analytical techniques on the natural environment and human health [12]. As the field has evolved, the need for standardized metrics to evaluate and compare the greenness of analytical methods has become increasingly important. This has led to the development of several assessment tools, each with unique approaches and evaluation criteria [2].

The validation of greenness scores across multiple tools has emerged as a critical research focus, as different tools may yield varying conclusions about a method's environmental performance [13]. This comparative guide provides an objective analysis of four major greenness assessment tools—National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI), Eco-Scale Assessment (ESA), Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI), and Analytical GREEnness Metric (AGREE)—to help researchers navigate the landscape of green analytical chemistry and make informed decisions about method selection and development.

Comprehensive Tool Analysis

National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI)

NEMI, developed by the Methods and Data Comparability Board, stands as one of the oldest and most fundamental greenness assessment tools [2]. Its evaluation system employs a simple pictogram—a circle divided into four quadrants—with each quadrant representing a specific environmental criterion. A quadrant is colored green only if the method meets the associated requirement [2].

The four criteria assessed by NEMI are: (1) none of the chemicals used appear on the Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) list; (2) no solvents used are categorized as hazardous waste (D, F, P, or U lists); (3) the method operates at a non-corrosive pH (between 2 and 12); and (4) waste generation does not exceed 50 g per analysis [2]. This binary pass/fail system provides immediate, general information about a method's environmental impact at a glance.

Despite its historical significance and simplicity, NEMI faces substantial limitations. It provides only qualitative information and lacks granularity, as it doesn't account for the precise amounts of reagents used or energy consumption [2]. A significant practical limitation noted in comparative studies is that NEMI's limited resolution often results in multiple methods receiving identical pictograms, making it difficult to distinguish between their relative greenness performances [13].

Analytical Eco-Scale Assessment (ESA)

The Analytical Eco-Scale Assessment introduces a quantitative approach to greenness evaluation based on a penalty points system [2]. Unlike NEMI's binary output, ESA assigns an ideal green analysis a baseline score of 100 points, then subtracts penalty points based on the amounts of reagents, energy consumption, potential hazards, and waste generated [2]. This results in a numerical score that allows for more nuanced comparisons between methods.

According to the ESA framework, a score of 100 represents a perfect green analysis, which requires that solvents/reagents pose no hazards, energy consumption is below 0.1 kWh per sample, and no waste is produced [2]. Scores above 75 represent excellent green analysis, scores between 50 and 75 indicate acceptable greenness, while scores below 50 denote inadequate green character [2]. This graduated scoring system provides clearer differentiations between methods compared to NEMI's categorical approach.

The principal advantage of ESA lies in its semi-quantitative nature, which offers more granularity than NEMI [13]. However, its limitation is that penalty points are assigned based on reagent amounts and hazards without always considering their specific roles in the analysis, potentially overlooking important context about method functionality [2].

Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI)

The Green Analytical Procedure Index represents a more sophisticated approach to greenness assessment that expands evaluation scope beyond basic chemical parameters [12]. GAPI employs a comprehensive pictogram with five pentagrams, each color-coded green, yellow, or red to represent low, medium, or high environmental impact across multiple criteria [2]. This tool evaluates the entire analytical procedure across its lifecycle, from sample collection and preparation to transportation, reagent nature, instrumentation, and final waste disposal [12].

GAPI's key innovation is its ability to provide a detailed visual assessment of where environmental impacts occur throughout the analytical process [13]. By breaking down the analysis into distinct stages and evaluating each separately, GAPI helps identify specific areas for improvement, making it particularly valuable for method development and optimization.

The main advantage of GAPI is its comprehensive coverage of environmental factors, though this comes with increased complexity compared to simpler tools like NEMI and ESA [13]. While it offers more detailed insights, the multi-factor assessment can be more time-consuming to complete, and like other model-based approaches, it relies on certain estimations and assumptions that may introduce inaccuracies [4].

Analytical GREEnness Metric (AGREE)

AGREE represents the next generation of greenness assessment tools, incorporating automated calculation and a more nuanced scoring system [13]. This metric evaluates 12 distinct principles of Green Analytical Chemistry, assigning each a score between 0 and 1, and calculates a weighted overall score from 0 to 1, where 1 represents ideal greenness [2]. The results are presented in a circular pictogram with 12 sections, each color-coded from red to green based on performance for that principle, with the overall score displayed in the center [2].

A significant advantage of AGREE is its balance between comprehensiveness and user-friendliness. The tool is available as open-source software, automating the calculation process and reducing subjectivity in assessment [13]. AGREE also effectively highlights the weakest points in analytical techniques, directing attention to areas needing improvement [13].

Comparative studies have shown that AGREE provides reliable numerical assessments similar to ESA but with the added benefit of a more descriptive, multi-colored pictogram that visually communicates strengths and weaknesses across all GAC principles [13]. This combination of features has positioned AGREE as one of the most sophisticated and user-friendly tools currently available for greenness assessment.

Comparative Analysis

Tool Characteristics and Methodologies

Table 1: Comparative Characteristics of Major Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool	Assessment Type	Output Format	Key Criteria Evaluated	Complexity Level
NEMI	Qualitative	4-quadrant pictogram	PBT chemicals, hazardous solvents, pH, waste amount	Low
Eco-Scale	Semi-quantitative	Numerical score (0-100)	Reagent hazards, amounts, energy, waste	Medium
GAPI	Semi-quantitative	Multi-section pictogram	Entire process from sampling to waste disposal	High
AGREE	Quantitative	12-section pictogram with overall score	12 principles of GAC	Medium-High

Applications and Performance in Method Evaluation

A comparative case study evaluating 16 chromatographic methods for hyoscine N-butyl bromide assay revealed crucial differences in tool performance [13]. The study found NEMI to be the least effective in differentiation, as 14 of the 16 methods received identical NEMI pictograms, failing to distinguish meaningful differences in environmental performance [13]. This demonstrates a significant limitation of NEMI for comparative assessments where fine distinctions are necessary.

Both ESA and AGREE provided reliable numerical assessments, though with different scoring ranges (0-100 for ESA, 0-1 for AGREE) [13]. AGREE demonstrated particular advantages in automation and its ability to highlight specific weaknesses in analytical techniques, providing clear direction for greenness improvements [13]. GAPI and AGREE both offered fully descriptive three-colored pictograms, with AGREE having merits of simplicity and automation over GAPI's more complex assessment process [13].

Strategic Implementation in Analytical Practice

The selection of an appropriate assessment tool depends heavily on the specific application context. For initial screening where simple, quick evaluations are needed, NEMI or Eco-Scale may be sufficient. For comprehensive method development or when detailed comparisons are required, GAPI or AGREE provide more nuanced insights. For automated assessment with clear visual output, AGREE offers significant advantages [13].

Recent research emphasizes the importance of using multiple assessment tools when evaluating analytical method greenness, as each tool provides different perspectives and insights [13]. This multi-tool approach is particularly valuable in pharmaceutical analysis, where methods must balance environmental concerns with analytical performance requirements [14] [15].

Advanced Concepts and Future Directions

Integration with Functional Assessment: The Whiteness Concept

The evolution of greenness assessment has recently expanded toward more holistic evaluation frameworks that balance environmental concerns with functional performance. White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) has emerged as an approach that seeks the optimal compromise between greenness (environmental impact), redness (analytical performance), and blueness (practicality and economy) [8]. In this RGB color model, a "whiter" method represents a better balance across all three attributes [8].

This integrated approach addresses a critical limitation of standalone greenness assessment—the potential compromise of analytical effectiveness for environmental benefits. Tools like the Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI) for practicality and the newly developed Red Analytical Performance Index (RAPI) for analytical performance now complement greenness metrics, enabling comprehensive RGB assessment [8]. The implementation of these complementary tools helps ensure that environmentally friendly methods remain functionally viable for real-world applications.

Good Evaluation Practice in Greenness Assessment

As the field matures, researchers have identified the need for standardized evaluation practices. Recent proposals for Good Evaluation Practice (GEP) emphasize five key rules: (1) use quantitative indicators based on empirical data; (2) combine models with varied structures for a comprehensive picture; (3) ensure proper context and comparison; (4) verify the assessment scope matches the method scope; and (5) maintain transparency and critical perspective [4].

These guidelines address common pitfalls in greenness assessment, such as over-reliance on single metrics, inadequate context, and insufficient transparency in assumptions and calculations. The implementation of GEP promotes more reliable, reproducible, and meaningful greenness evaluations that genuinely contribute to method improvement rather than serving merely as publication enhancements [4].

Table 2: Key Tools and Software for Greenness Assessment

Tool/Resource	Type	Primary Function	Access Information
NEMI Database	Database	Searchable repository of environmental methods	https://www.nemi.gov/ [16]
AGREE Calculator	Software	Automated AGREE score calculation	Open-source software [13]
BAGI Tool	Software	Practicality (blueness) assessment	https://mostwiedzy.pl/bagi [8]
RAPI Tool	Software	Analytical performance (redness) assessment	https://mostwiedzy.pl/rapi [8]

The landscape of greenness assessment tools has evolved significantly from simple binary evaluations to sophisticated multi-criteria metrics. NEMI provides basic qualitative assessment but lacks differentiation power. Eco-Scale introduces valuable quantitative scoring but has limitations in scope. GAPI offers comprehensive lifecycle assessment with visual output, though with greater complexity. AGREE balances automation, comprehensiveness, and user-friendliness with its weighted principles and clear pictogram.

For researchers validating greenness scores across multiple tools, the evidence suggests that relying on a single metric is insufficient for robust assessment [13]. A combination of AGREE or GAPI with Eco-Scale provides both detailed visual mapping and quantitative comparison capabilities. Furthermore, the integration of these greenness tools with functional assessment metrics like BAGI and RAPI enables true White Analytical Chemistry evaluation, ensuring methods meet environmental goals without compromising analytical performance or practical utility [8].

As the field advances, the implementation of Good Evaluation Practice principles will be crucial for generating reliable, meaningful assessments that genuinely advance sustainability in analytical chemistry while maintaining the methodological rigor required for pharmaceutical applications and other critical analytical fields.

Greenness Assessment Tools and Workflow

In the landscape of modern analytical chemistry, the initial focus on environmental sustainability, known as Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), has evolved into a more comprehensive framework. While GAC successfully emphasized minimizing environmental impact by reducing toxic solvent use, waste generation, and energy consumption, its primary limitation was the potential trade-off with analytical performance and practical usability [17].

White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) emerged to address this gap by introducing a holistic evaluation model that balances environmental friendliness with analytical quality and practical feasibility [18] [17]. This approach is visually and conceptually anchored in the RGB model, where the three primary colors represent core assessment pillars: Red for analytical performance, Green for environmental impact, and Blue for practical/economic aspects [19] [20]. The "whiteness" of a method symbolizes the ideal equilibrium between these three dimensions, indicating a method that is not only sustainable but also functionally effective and practically viable [18].

The RGB Model: Deconstructing the Framework

The RGB model provides a structured methodology for quantifying and visualizing the whiteness of an analytical procedure. Its power lies in translating diverse methodological attributes into a unified, comparative score.

The Three Pillars of Assessment

• The Red Component (Analytical Performance): This dimension assesses the fundamental ability of a method to generate reliable, high-quality data. Key metrics include accuracy, precision, sensitivity (e.g., limit of detection), selectivity, linearity, and robustness [18] [17]. A method with a strong red component fulfills all necessary analytical validation parameters.
• The Green Component (Environmental Impact): This pillar evaluates the ecological footprint of the method, drawing from the 12 principles of GAC. It encompasses factors such as the toxicity and volume of reagents/solvents used, energy consumption, waste generation and disposal, and the overall safety for operators and the environment [19] [17]. Tools like the ChlorTox Scale and AGREE are often used to quantify this dimension [19] [21].
• The Blue Component (Practicality and Economics): This dimension addresses the real-world applicability of the method. It includes criteria such as time-efficiency, cost-effectiveness, operational simplicity, availability of equipment, safety considerations, and potential for automation [20] [17]. The Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI) is a specific metric developed to evaluate this aspect [20] [22].

Quantifying Whiteness: From Principles to Practice

The overall whiteness score is a composite measure derived from the scores of the individual RGB criteria. The specific calculation can vary between different implementations of the model. Some approaches use averaging, while others, like the RGBfast and RGBsynt models, employ more complex algorithms that automatically assess parameters relative to a set of compared methods [19]. The result is a single, normalized percentage that represents the method's holistic quality, where a higher score indicates a more balanced and "white" method [22].

Table 1: Core Dimensions of the RGB Model in White Analytical Chemistry

Dimension	Core Principle	Key Metrics	Example Assessment Tools
Red (Analytical Performance)	Method's ability to generate reliable, high-quality data	Accuracy, precision, sensitivity (LOD), selectivity, linearity, robustness	Red Analytical Performance Index (RAPI) [20] [21]
Green (Environmental Impact)	Minimization of ecological and safety hazards	Solvent toxicity, waste amount (E-factor), energy demand, reagent hazard	AGREE, GAPI, ChlorTox Scale [19] [12] [21]
Blue (Practicality & Economics)	Feasibility for routine and industrial application	Cost, time-efficiency, operational simplicity, equipment availability, safety	Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI) [20] [22]

Complementary Evaluation Metrics and Tools

While the RGB model provides a foundational structure, the scientific community has developed a rich ecosystem of metrics to refine the assessment of each dimension. The following diagram illustrates the relationships between these tools within the holistic evaluation framework.

Figure 1: The WAC Tool Ecosystem. This diagram shows how specialized metrics support the holistic evaluation of analytical methods. Core tools for the RGB dimensions are complemented by newer tools like VIGI for innovation and GLANCE for reporting clarity.

The proliferation of these tools underscores a critical need for Good Evaluation Practice (GEP), which recommends using quantitative indicators based on empirical data and combining models with different structures to ensure a comprehensive and reliable assessment [4].

Experimental Validation: WAC and RGB in Action

Case Study: HPLC-DAD Method for Donepezil HCl and Curcumin

A practical application of WAC assessment was demonstrated in the development and validation of an HPLC-DAD method for the simultaneous quantitation of Donepezil HCl and Curcumin in nanoliposomes [22].

• Experimental Protocol: The method employed a Zobrax Eclipse Plus C18 column with a gradient elution using a mobile phase of 0.02 M phosphate buffer (pH 3.2) and ethanol. Detection was via a diode array detector at 273 nm and 435 nm. The method was validated per ICH guidelines, demonstrating linearity (0.1–100 µg/mL for both analytes), accuracy, and precision [22].
• WAC Assessment Outcome: The method was evaluated using multiple metrics. Its greenness was confirmed by the AGREE calculator and MoGAPI, while its practicality was scored with the BAGI metric. Finally, the RGB algorithm was applied to calculate its overall whiteness. The study concluded that the whiteness, blueness, and greenness profiles demonstrated a "major benefit" of the proposed method over previously reported ones, which often used more toxic organic solvents [22].

Comparative Analysis: Mechanochemistry vs. Solution-Based Synthesis

The RGBsynt model, an adaptation of the RGB framework for chemical synthesis, was used to objectively compare 17 mechanochemical procedures with their traditional solution-based counterparts for reactions like O- and N-alkylation [19].

• Experimental Protocol & Data Input: The evaluation was based on six key parameters aligned with the RGB colors [19]:
  • Red (Functionality): Yield (%) and Product Purity (%).
  • Green & Blue (Environmental & Practical): E-factor (mass of waste/product).
  • Green: ChlorTox Scale (comprehensive chemical risk).
  • Blue: Time-efficiency (total synthesis time).
  • Green & Blue: Estimated energy demand.
• Results and Conclusion: The RGBsynt analysis, automated via an Excel spreadsheet, clearly indicated the superiority of mechanochemical approaches. These methods scored higher not only in reducing environmental impact (greenness) but also in the overall potential (whiteness), showcasing a successful synergy between sustainability and functionality [19].

Table 2: Comparative Analysis of WAC Application in Two Experimental Cases

Aspect	HPLC-DAD for Nanoliposomes [22]	Mechanochemical Synthesis [19]
Analytical Technique/Field	Pharmaceutical Analysis (HPLC)	Synthetic Chemistry (Mechanochemistry)
Key RGB Metrics Used	BAGI (Blue), AGREE (Green), RGB model (Whiteness)	Yield, Purity (Red); E-factor, ChlorTox (Green); Time, Energy (Blue)
Validation Outcome	Superior whiteness vs. published HPTLC method	Superior greenness and whiteness vs. solution-based synthesis
Practical Implication	Greener, more practical QC method for complex formulation	Evidence for adopting solvent-free synthesis in API development

The Essential Research Toolkit

Implementing WAC and the RGB model requires a combination of conceptual frameworks and practical tools. Below is a summary of key "reagent solutions" for researchers.

Table 3: Essential Toolkit for Implementing WAC and RGB Assessment

Tool / Solution	Function / Description	Relevance in WAC/RGB Context
RGBsynt Model [19]	An Excel-based model for assessing whiteness in chemical synthesis.	Provides a standardized template for quantifying R, G, B, and whiteness scores for synthetic procedures.
AGREE Calculator [12] [21]	A software-based metric that calculates a greenness score based on the 12 principles of GAC.	Quantifies the Green component. Outputs a pictogram and a score between 0 and 1.
BAGI Metric [20] [22]	The Blue Applicability Grade Index assessing practical features like cost, time, and ease of use.	Quantifies the Blue component, complementing greenness metrics.
ChlorTox Scale [19]	A greenness indicator estimating overall chemical risk based on reagent quantities and hazards.	Provides a quantitative measure for the Green component, focusing on chemical safety.
VIGI (Violet Innovation Grade Index) [20]	A survey-based visual tool that evaluates the innovative strength of an analytical method.	Complements RGB by adding a Violet dimension, assessing innovation beyond core performance.

The rise of White Analytical Chemistry and the RGB model marks a significant paradigm shift, moving beyond a singular focus on environmental impact toward a balanced, holistic view of method quality. By integrating analytical performance (Red), environmental sustainability (Green), and practical applicability (Blue), the WAC framework provides a robust, multi-criteria decision-making tool for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals.

The experimental validations and case studies confirm its utility, demonstrating that it is possible to develop methods that are not only greener but also analytically superior and more practical. As the field advances with new complementary tools and standardized practices like GEP, WAC is poised to become the foundational framework for developing and validating analytical methods that truly meet the complex demands of modern science and sustainable development.

Understanding the Need for Multi-Tool Validation in Regulated Environments

In regulated industries such as pharmaceuticals, validated systems are not merely a best practice but a regulatory necessity. A validated system is a computer system that has been tested and documented to prove it does what it’s supposed to do, consistently, accurately, and in compliance with all applicable regulations [23]. The process ensures the system meets business requirements and regulatory standards every time it is used, which is critical for protecting consumers and ensuring data integrity [23]. With the rise of new technologies and analytical methods, establishing their validity through a rigorous, multi-tool approach is essential for maintaining compliance and achieving reliable, sustainable outcomes. This guide explores this need through the specific lens of validating greenness scores across multiple analytical tools.

The Regulatory Imperative for Validation

Core Principles of System Validation

In regulated environments like those governed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), validation is mandated for any system impacting product quality or patient safety [23] [24]. Key principles include:

• Documentation and Traceability: Every phase of the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) requires comprehensive documentation, including a Validation Plan, User Requirements Specification, Functional Specifications, and Test Plans. Each document must be reviewed, approved, and maintained to provide a complete, auditable trail of compliance [23].
• Risk-Based Approach: A typical quality risk management process involves identifying what can go wrong, the probability of it happening, and the consequences. Validation acts as a critical risk control measure [24].
• Ongoing Process: Validation is not a one-time event but an ongoing commitment to quality, documentation, and controlled change management. Even a simple software update can trigger re-validation [23].

The Challenge of Modern Tools: Cloud and AI

The validation landscape is complicated by the adoption of cloud computing and Artificial Intelligence (AI).

• Cloud Computing Tools: Software as a Service (SaaS) and Platform as a Service (PaaS) models offer advantages like automatic updates and reduced IT burden. However, these same features pose a validation challenge because updates can occur without the user's knowledge, making it difficult to maintain a validated state [25]. A sustainable framework involves initial "black box testing" and strategies for automated regression testing upon vendor updates [25].
• AI in GxP Environments: The FDA has begun to outline a risk-based credibility assessment framework for AI models. This involves defining the question of interest and context of use, assessing model risk, and executing a plan to establish credibility [26]. A critical rule is that AI should not replace knowledgeable individuals; its output must always be subject to human review and verification [26].

Greenness Scoring: A Case for Multi-Tool Validation

The "What" and "Why" of Analytical Method Greenness Scoring

The drive for sustainability has made "greenness" a key metric in laboratory sciences. The Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS) is a metric that evaluates the environmental impact of an analytical method. It considers the instrument type, run times, and solvents used [27]. For laboratories using validated methods, such as United States Pharmacopeia (USP) monographs, re-validation to use more sustainable solvents can be prohibitively expensive and time-consuming. A viable path to sustainability is modernization—migrating a method to newer, more efficient instrumentation without changing the core chemistry, which subsequently improves the AMGS [27].

Experimental Protocol for Modernization and Greenness Assessment

The following workflow outlines a standardized protocol for modernizing a validated analytical method and calculating its greenness score. This process ensures compliance is maintained while enhancing sustainability.

Diagram Title: Method Modernization and Greenness Validation Workflow

This protocol was applied to the USP monograph for naproxen sodium tablets, migrating it from High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) to Ultra-High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (UHPLC) and Ultra-Performance Liquid Chromatography (UPLC) systems [27].

Comparative Performance Data: A Multi-Tool Analysis

The modernization of the naproxen assay demonstrates the critical improvements that can be achieved. The data below provides a quantitative comparison of performance and sustainability metrics across the three technological platforms.

Table 1: Performance Comparison for Naproxen Assay Modernization [27]

Metric	HPLC (Baseline)	UHPLC	UPLC
Particle Size	5 µm	Sub-2 µm	Sub-2 µm
Flow Rate	1.2 mL/min	0.6 mL/min	0.6 mL/min
Run Time	8 minutes	2 minutes	1 minute
Solvent Usage per Injection	9.6 mL	1.2 mL	0.6 mL
Time for 10,000 Injections	55 days	14 days	7 days
Solvent Cost for 10,000 Injections	~$10,000	~$1,250	~$625

Table 2: Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS) Comparison [27]

Score Component	HPLC (Baseline)	UHPLC	UPLC
Instrument Energy Score	82.9	20.7	10.4
Solvent Energy Score	23.3	5.8	2.9
Solvent EHS Score	3.9	1.0	0.5
Total Greenness Score (AMGS)	110.1	27.5	13.8

The data clearly shows that modernization leads to a dramatic reduction in the AMGS, indicating a much more sustainable method. The UPLC method, in particular, demonstrated an 8-fold reduction in run time and a 13-fold reduction in solvent consumption, which directly translated into the lowest (best) AMGS of 13.8 [27].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The successful execution of method modernization and validation requires specific materials and tools. The following table details key items used in the featured naproxen study and their general functions in such analytical workflows.

Table 3: Key Research Reagents and Materials for Method Validation

Item	Function in the Experiment
USP Monograph Standard	Provides the official, validated reference method for the drug substance (e.g., Naproxen), ensuring regulatory compliance from the outset.
HPLC/UHPLC/UPLC Systems	The core analytical instrumentation for separation; the platform choice directly impacts throughput, solvent use, and greenness score.
Chromatography Column	The stationary phase (varying by particle size, e.g., 5µm vs. sub-2µm) responsible for separating the analyte; key to method performance.
MS-Grade Solvents	High-purity solvents (e.g., acetonitrile) used in mobile phase preparation to ensure low background noise and reproducible results.
Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS) Calculator	A free tool from the ACS Green Chemistry Institute used to calculate the sustainability metric based on instrument and solvent parameters [27].

The case study on modernizing the naproxen USP monograph underscores a critical finding: validating performance and greenness across multiple tools is not optional but essential for forward-thinking laboratories in regulated industries. Relying on data from a single platform provides a limited and potentially outdated view. A multi-tool comparison, as demonstrated, offers a robust framework for making informed decisions that balance compliance, operational efficiency, and sustainability goals. As regulatory agencies like the FDA evolve their guidance for AI and cloud-based tools, the principles of rigorous, evidence-based validation across multiple systems will only grow in importance. Embracing this multi-tool approach ensures that laboratories are not only compliant today but are also prepared for the technological and environmental demands of the future.

A Practical Guide to Implementing and Scoring with Key Metrics

Step-by-Step Guide to the AGREE Calculator and Its Twelve Criteria

In the pharmaceutical industry and analytical chemistry fields, the demand for sustainable practices has catalyzed the development of metrics to quantify the environmental impact of analytical methods. Among these, the Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) calculator has emerged as a prominent tool for evaluating the greenness of analytical procedures. This comprehensive guide examines the AGREE metric within the broader context of green analytical chemistry (GAC) principles and compares it with other available assessment tools. As the drive toward sustainability intensifies—exemplified by corporate commitments like AstraZeneca's ambition to achieve carbon zero status for analytical laboratories by 2030—the ability to accurately measure and improve the environmental footprint of analytical methods becomes increasingly critical [28].

The AGREE calculator distinguishes itself through its foundation in the 12 principles of Green Analytical Chemistry and its user-friendly visual output system [29] [21]. Unlike earlier assessment tools that provided simplistic binary evaluations, AGREE offers a nuanced, multi-criteria approach that generates both numerical scores and color-coded pictograms, enabling analysts to quickly identify strengths and weaknesses in their methodologies [21]. This step-by-step guide will explore the implementation of AGREE, its twelve criteria, and its position within the expanding ecosystem of green assessment tools.

The Twelve Criteria of AGREE: Principles and Implementation

The AGREE evaluation tool assesses analytical methods against twelve criteria derived from the foundational principles of Green Analytical Chemistry [29]. Each criterion is scored on a scale from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating better environmental performance. The following table details these criteria and provides guidance on their practical application:

Table 1: The Twelve Assessment Criteria of the AGREE Calculator

Criterion Number	Assessment Principle	Key Considerations	Data Requirements
1	Direct analysis	Avoidance of sample preparation stages; minimal processing	Number of sample preparation steps
2	Minimal sample size	Small sample volumes; miniaturization where possible	Sample volume/size used
3	In situ analysis	Analysis at point of need; no transportation	Ability to perform analysis on-site
4	Integrated processes	Combination of analytical steps; streamlined workflows	Degree of process integration
5	Automation and miniaturization	Use of automated systems; reduced scale of operations	Level of automation; equipment scale
6	Avoid derivatization	Elimination of derivative formation steps	Use of derivatization agents
7	Waste generation	Amount and hazard of waste produced	Waste volume and toxicity
8	Multi-analyte analysis	Simultaneous determination of multiple analytes	Number of analytes measured per run
9	Energy consumption	Total energy demand of analytical process	Instrument power requirements; run time
10	Renewable sources	Use of bio-based or renewable reagents	Source and sustainability of reagents
11	Toxicity of reagents	Hazard level of chemicals employed	Toxicity classifications; safety data
12	Operator safety	Risk of exposure; protective equipment required	Health hazard assessments

The AGREE assessment process is conducted using intuitive, open-access software that produces a straightforward pictogram [29]. The software automatically calculates scores for each criterion based on user inputs and generates a circular diagram with twelve colored segments, providing immediate visual feedback on method performance across all principles [29].

AGREE Assessment Workflow

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Tools

While AGREE provides a comprehensive evaluation framework, it exists within a broader landscape of green metrics, each with distinct strengths, limitations, and applications. The following table compares AGREE with other prominent assessment tools:

Table 2: Comparison of Green Analytical Chemistry Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Assessment Focus	Scoring System	Key Features	Limitations
AGREE	Entire analytical procedure	0-1 scale for 12 criteria; visual pictogram	Based on 12 GAC principles; open-access software	Limited granularity for specific techniques [28]
AGREEprep	Sample preparation stage	0-1 scale for 10 criteria; weighted assessment	Specialized for sample prep; adjustable weights	Requires detailed waste/energy data [30]
Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS)	Chromatographic methods	Multi-dimensional scoring	Includes instrument energy; solvent safety/toxicity	Limited to chromatography [28]
GAPI	Holistic procedure evaluation	Color-coded pentagrams (green/yellow/red)	Visual assessment; detailed stage breakdown	No numerical scoring; less granular [28] [21]
Analytical Eco-Scale	Semi-quantitative impact	Penalty points subtracted from base 100	Simple numerical result; quick assessment	Less comprehensive than newer tools [28]
BAGI	Method practicality	0-100 scale; blue-color pictogram	Assesses applicability; complements green metrics	Does not evaluate environmental impact [29]
NEMI	Environmental impact	Binary pass/fail for 4 criteria	Simple; quick screening tool	Lacks nuance; outdated standards [21]

Tool Selection and Complementary Use

The selection of an appropriate assessment tool depends on the specific analytical context and evaluation goals. AGREE excels in providing a balanced, comprehensive overview of the entire analytical procedure, while specialized tools like AGREEprep offer deeper insights into sample preparation stages, and AMGS provides technique-specific evaluation for chromatography [30] [28]. Research indicates that employing multiple complementary tools can yield the most robust sustainability assessment. For example, a study on phthalate analysis in edible oils utilized AGREE, AGREEprep, and BAGI together to evaluate both environmental impact and practical applicability [29].

Experimental Protocols for Greenness Assessment Validation

Validating greenness scores across multiple tools requires systematic experimental protocols. The following methodology outlines a framework for comparative assessment:

Protocol for Cross-Tool Validation

• Method Selection and Characterization

  • Select analytical methods with complete documentation of all procedural steps
  • Record detailed data on: sample volumes, reagent types and quantities, energy consumption, waste generation, instrumentation, and analysis time
  • Establish baseline performance metrics for each method

• Multi-Tool Assessment

  • Apply AGREE, AGREEprep, AMGS, GAPI, and other relevant tools to each method
  • Maintain consistent input parameters across all assessments
  • Document all weighting factors and calculation assumptions

• Data Analysis and Correlation

  • Calculate correlation coefficients between scores from different tools
  • Identify consistent outperformers and underperformers across metrics
  • Analyze discrepancies to understand tool-specific priorities and biases

A recent application of this approach demonstrated that microwave-assisted extraction followed by gel permeation chromatography and SPE was the least green procedure for phthalate analysis in edible oils, while Surface-Enhanced Raman Spectroscopy (SERS) emerged as the greenest alternative when assessed with AGREE and other tools [29].

Experimental Data from Comparative Studies

Table 3: Greenness Scores for Phthalate Analysis Methods in Edible Oils [29]

Analytical Method	Sample Preparation Technique	Determination Technique	AGREE Score	AGREEprep Score	BAGI Score
Method 1	MAE-GPC-SPE	GC-MS	0.45	0.38	65
Method 2	LLE-dSPE	GC-MS	0.52	0.44	70
Method 3	QuEChERS	LC-MS/MS	0.61	0.52	75
Method 4	MSPE	HPLC-FLD	0.58	0.55	72
Method 5	SPME	GC-MS	0.64	0.59	78
Method 6	SERS	Direct analysis	0.82	0.76	85

Advanced Implementation: Weighting and Customization

A sophisticated feature of AGREE and AGREEprep is their support for adjustable weighting factors across criteria, enabling users to customize assessments based on specific priorities or organizational sustainability goals [21]. While default weights are available and widely used, the flexibility to emphasize certain principles (e.g., waste reduction over energy consumption, or operator safety over sample throughput) enhances the relevance of assessments for specific contexts [21].

Current research indicates that most users employ default weights, but methodological guidance suggests that establishing context-appropriate weighting schemes through expert consultation or multi-criteria decision analysis can significantly improve assessment accuracy and relevance [21]. This approach is particularly valuable in regulated environments like pharmaceutical analysis, where certain aspects of analytical procedures may be fixed due to validation requirements.

Table 4: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Chemistry

Resource Category	Specific Tools/Software	Function/Purpose	Access Information
Greenness Assessment Software	AGREE Calculator	Evaluates overall analytical method greenness	Free download [29]
	AGREEprep Software	Specialized evaluation of sample preparation	Open-access [30]
	BAGI Software	Assesses method practicality and applicability	Free available tool [29]
Solvent Selection Guides	ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable	Guides selection of greener solvents	Industry collaboration resource
Energy Calculation Tools	AMGS Energy Module	Calculates chromatographic energy consumption	Part of AMGS tool [28]
Waste Assessment Resources	AGREEprep Waste Calculator	Estimates waste generation in sample prep	Incorporated in AGREEprep [30]

The AGREE calculator represents a significant advancement in the quantification and visualization of analytical method greenness. Its comprehensive twelve-criteria framework, based on established GAC principles, provides researchers with a robust tool for evaluating and improving the environmental sustainability of their methodologies. When used in conjunction with complementary tools like AGREEprep for sample preparation, AMGS for chromatography, and BAGI for practicality assessment, analysts can develop a multidimensional understanding of their methods' environmental impact and identify targeted improvement strategies.

Future developments in greenness assessment are likely to focus on increasing tool specificity for different analytical techniques, standardizing weighting approaches, improving data quality requirements, and addressing potential redundancies in assessment criteria [21]. As the field evolves, the integration of greenness assessment into routine analytical method development and validation will be essential for achieving meaningful progress toward sustainable analytical chemistry practices. For pharmaceutical companies and research institutions committed to sustainability goals, tools like AGREE provide the measurement capability necessary to drive continuous improvement and demonstrate environmental responsibility.

Applying the Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) and ComplexGAPI

The growing emphasis on sustainability in laboratories has driven the development of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC), which aims to minimize the environmental impact of analytical procedures while maintaining analytical performance [2]. GAC principles focus on reducing hazardous chemical use, minimizing waste generation, and optimizing energy consumption throughout analytical processes [17]. To quantify and standardize the evaluation of method environmental impact, several assessment tools have been developed, with the Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) and its enhanced version, ComplexGAPI, representing significant advancements in this field [2] [31].

These metrics enable researchers to visually communicate the environmental footprint of their methods, facilitating comparison and selection of greener alternatives [8]. The evolution from GAPI to ComplexGAPI addresses the need for a more comprehensive assessment that covers the entire analytical procedure with greater granularity [31]. Within the broader framework of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC), which balances environmental impact (green), analytical performance (red), and practical/economic aspects (blue), these tools provide the crucial environmental component for holistic method evaluation [8] [17].

Comprehensive Comparison of Green Assessment Metrics

Multiple metrics have been developed to assess the greenness of analytical methods, each with distinct approaches, strengths, and limitations. The selection of an appropriate tool depends on the specific analytical technique, required assessment depth, and desired output format. While earlier tools like NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index) provided basic qualitative assessment through a simple pictogram, they lacked granularity and quantitative scoring capabilities [2]. The Analytical Eco-Scale introduced a points-based system that penalizes hazardous practices, but its calculation process can be complex [31]. More recent tools like AGREE (Analytical GREEnness metric) and GEMAM (Greenness Evaluation Metric for Analytical Methods) offer quantitative scores on a 0-1 or 0-10 scale, providing more nuanced environmental profiling [31].

Figure 1: Evolution of Green Assessment Tools

Comparative Analysis of Major Metrics

Table 1: Comparison of Major Green Analytical Chemistry Assessment Tools

Metric	Assessment Scope	Output Format	Scoring System	Key Advantages	Main Limitations
NEMI	General analytical methods	Qualitative pictogram	Binary (green/uncolored)	Simple, quick visualization	Qualitative only, limited criteria [2]
Analytical Eco-Scale	Comprehensive analytical procedures	Quantitative score (0-100)	Penalty point subtraction	Quantitative, comprehensive	Complex calculation process [2] [31]
GAPI	Detailed method steps	Semi-quantitative colored pictogram	5-level color scale	Visual, covers multiple steps	Qualitative/semi-quantitative only [31]
AGREE	Comprehensive analytical procedures	Quantitative score (0-1) with pictogram	Weighted criteria (0-1)	Quantitative, user-friendly software	--
ComplexGAPI	Enhanced method details	Semi-quantitative colored pictogram	Enhanced 5-level scale	More detailed than GAPI	Qualitative/semi-quantitative only [32] [31]
GEMAM	Entire analytical assay	Quantitative score (0-10) with pictogram	21 weighted criteria	Comprehensive, covers 6 key dimensions	Newer, less established [31]

Detailed Examination of GAPI and ComplexGAPI

GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index)

GAPI utilizes a five-area pictogram that assesses environmental impact across different stages of the analytical process. Each area is divided into five segments corresponding to specific assessment criteria, with colors indicating environmental performance levels from green (excellent) to red (poor) [31]. This tool provides a more detailed visual assessment compared to earlier metrics like NEMI, allowing researchers to identify specific areas for improvement within their analytical methods. The strength of GAPI lies in its ability to provide a quick visual snapshot of a method's environmental impact across multiple dimensions, though it lacks the quantitative scoring capabilities of more recent tools [31].

ComplexGAPI Enhancements

ComplexGAPI represents an advanced version of GAPI that offers more granular assessment capabilities across the analytical procedure [32]. While maintaining the visual pictogram approach of its predecessor, ComplexGAPI provides enhanced detail in its evaluation criteria, particularly for sample preparation and collection stages [31]. This enhanced version addresses one of the main limitations of the original GAPI by offering more comprehensive coverage of the analytical lifecycle, though it remains primarily qualitative or semi-quantitative in nature compared to fully quantitative tools like AGREE and GEMAM [31].

Practical Application and Experimental Protocols

Case Study: GC-MS Analysis of Pharmaceuticals

A practical application of greenness assessment was demonstrated in the development of a GC-MS method for simultaneous quantification of paracetamol and metoclopramide in pharmaceutical formulations and human plasma [33]. The analytical protocol employed ethanol-based extraction and utilized a high-polarity 5% Phenyl Methyl Silox column (30 m × 250 μm × 0.25 μm) with helium carrier gas at a constant flow rate of 2 mL/min [33].

Experimental Parameters

Separation was achieved within 5 minutes using optimized temperature programming, with detection at m/z 109 for paracetamol and m/z 86 for metoclopramide. The method was fully validated according to ICH guidelines, showing excellent linearity (PAR: 0.2-80 μg/mL, r² = 0.9999; MET: 0.3-90 μg/mL, r² = 0.9988) and precision (tablet recovery: 102.87 ± 3.605% PAR, 101.98 ± 3.392% MET; plasma recovery: 92.79 ± 1.521% PAR, 91.99 ± 2.153% MET) [33].

Greenness Assessment Results

The greenness of this GC-MS method was evaluated using three independent metrics: NEMI, GAPI, and AGREE. Additionally, its practicality was assessed using the Blue Applicability Grade Index (BAGI), which yielded a high score of 82.5, indicating excellent practical applicability [33]. The method demonstrated superior environmental performance compared to conventional liquid chromatography methods, primarily due to the elimination of liquid mobile phases and reduction in hazardous solvent consumption [33].

Case Study: VA-DLLME for Beta-Cyfluthrin Analysis

Another application demonstrates the use of GAPI and ComplexGAPI in evaluating a Vortex-Assisted Dispersive Liquid-Liquid Microextraction (VA-DLLME) methodology for determining beta-cyfluthrin in human blood and urine samples [32]. This approach combined miniaturized sample preparation with TLC-image analysis, incorporating principles of green analytical chemistry throughout the method development process.

Method Validation and Assessment

The method was rigorously validated according to SWGTOX forensic toxicology standards and evaluated for environmental impact using both AGREE and ComplexGAPI tools [32]. The application of these complementary assessment tools provided a comprehensive evaluation of both analytical performance and environmental sustainability, demonstrating the growing trend toward holistic method validation in modern analytical chemistry.

Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 2: Key Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Methods

Reagent/Material	Function in Analytical Process	Green Alternatives & Considerations
Extraction Solvents	Sample preparation, compound isolation	Ethanol, water, supercritical CO₂, less toxic solvents [33]
Derivatization Agents	Compound modification for detection	Minimize or eliminate use; choose less hazardous alternatives [31]
Mobile Phase Components	Chromatographic separation	Aqueous systems, ethanol-modified mobile phases [33]
Internal Standards	Quantification reference	Select compounds with minimal environmental impact
Calibration Standards	Method calibration and validation	Prepare in eco-friendly solvents where possible
Carrier Gases	GC mobile phase	Helium, nitrogen, hydrogen [33]

Integrated Assessment Approaches

White Analytical Chemistry Framework

The White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) concept provides a holistic framework that integrates environmental (green), functional/performance (red), and practical/economic (blue) criteria [8] [17]. Within this model, GAPI and ComplexGAPI specifically address the green component, while tools like RAPI (Red Analytical Performance Index) assess analytical performance, and BAGI (Blue Applicability Grade Index) evaluates practical applicability [8]. This integrated approach ensures that method selection balances all three critical aspects rather than prioritizing environmental considerations alone [17].

Figure 2: White Analytical Chemistry Framework

Complementary Use of Assessment Tools

Research demonstrates that the most comprehensive method evaluation comes from using multiple complementary tools. For example, a method might be assessed using GAPI or ComplexGAPI for environmental impact, RAPI for analytical performance, and BAGI for practical applicability [8] [33]. This multi-faceted approach provides researchers with a complete picture of a method's overall suitability, enabling informed decisions that balance environmental concerns with analytical requirements and practical constraints [17].

GAPI and ComplexGAPI represent significant advancements in the standardized assessment of analytical method environmental impact. While they provide valuable visual tools for evaluating greenness, they are most effective when used as part of a comprehensive assessment strategy that includes complementary tools like RAPI and BAGI within the White Analytical Chemistry framework. The continuing evolution of assessment metrics, including the recent development of GEMAM, reflects the analytical chemistry community's growing commitment to sustainability and holistic method evaluation. As the field progresses, the integration of these assessment tools into routine method development and validation protocols will be essential for advancing the principles of green and white analytical chemistry across research and industrial applications.

Utilizing the Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS) for Chromatography

The drive toward sustainability in the pharmaceutical industry has extended to analytical laboratories, where chromatographic methods are fundamental for quality control and regulatory compliance. The cumulative environmental impact of these methods is significant when scaled across global manufacturing networks; a case study of rosuvastatin calcium demonstrated that approximately 18,000 liters of mobile phase are consumed and disposed of annually for the chromatographic analysis of this single active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) across an estimated 1,000 batches produced globally each year [28].

To quantify and minimize this impact, the American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (ACS GCI PR) developed the Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS) calculator. This metric provides a straightforward way to summarize an analytical method's environmental impact with a single number, where a lower score indicates a greener method [34] [35] [36]. The AMGS differs from other greenness assessment tools by specifically incorporating instrumental energy consumption alongside solvent-related factors, providing a more holistic evaluation particularly relevant for chromatographic techniques [28] [37].

The AMGS Framework: Components and Calculation

Core Components of the AMGS Metric

The AMGS calculator evaluates the environmental impact of chromatographic methods across multiple dimensions. Unlike simpler metrics that focus primarily on solvent toxicity, the AMGS incorporates three primary components that contribute to the overall score:

• Solvent EHS Score: Assesses the health, safety, and environmental impact of solvents used in the method [34] [35]
• Solvent Energy Score: Accounts for the cumulative energy demand for solvent production and disposal [34] [35]
• Instrument Energy Score: Calculates energy consumption based on instrument type, run time, and number of injections [34] [35] [37]

The AMGS formula was designed to be a simplified yet comprehensive summary of a method's environmental impact. As Professor Daniel Armstrong explains, "It is formulated in the way of an equation, which includes terms to account for variables such as instrumental power consumption, solvent hazard, and solvent cumulative energy demand based on production and disposal" [36].

Calculation Methodology and Modifications

The standard AMGS calculation requires input parameters including instrument type, flow rate, run time, number of injections, solvent types and proportions, and sample preparation details [35] [38]. Recent research has proposed modifications to enhance the accuracy of the calculation. Armstrong and colleagues incorporated "cycle time" (the time between the method ending and the next injection) into the AMGS formula, revealing that there is an optimal flow rate that produces a minimum AMGS, which differs for every solvent [36].

The mathematical relationship for analysis time (tₐ) at any flow rate (F) when an initial run time (tᵢ) at one flow rate (Fᵢ) is known can be expressed as: tₐ = (tᵢ × Fᵢ)/F [36]

Substituting this equation into the AMGS calculation allows analysts to examine the effect of both cycle time and flow rate, enabling mathematical optimization of separation parameters for minimal environmental impact [36].

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Metrics

Multiple metrics have been developed to assess the greenness of analytical methods, each with distinct approaches, strengths, and limitations. The table below summarizes the key characteristics of major greenness assessment tools:

Table 1: Comparison of Major Green Analytical Chemistry Metrics

Metric Name	Assessment Type	Scope	Output Format	Key Strengths	Key Limitations
AMGS [31] [28]	Quantitative	Chromatography-specific	Numerical score	Includes instrument energy; Direct method comparison	No pictogram; Limited to chromatography
NEMI [31] [7]	Qualitative	General analytical	Pictogram (4 quadrants)	Simple visualization	Limited assessment criteria; No quantitative output
Analytical Eco-Scale [31] [28]	Semi-quantitative	General analytical	Numerical score (100-point scale)	Simple calculation; Penalty point system	No pictogram; Subjective penalty assignments
GAPI [31] [28]	Qualitative	General analytical	Pictogram (5 pentagrams)	Comprehensive life cycle assessment	Complex drawing; No quantitative score
AGREE [31] [39]	Quantitative	General analytical	Pictogram (12 segments) + 0-1 score	Comprehensive; Visual and numerical output	Complex calculation; Requires software
GEMAM [31]	Quantitative	General analytical	Pictogram (7 hexagons) + 0-10 score	Customizable weights; Comprehensive	New metric; Limited track record

Advantages of AMGS for Chromatographic Applications

The AMGS calculator offers several distinct advantages for chromatographic method assessment:

• Technique-Specific Evaluation: Unlike general metrics, AMGS is specifically designed for chromatography, with built-in parameters for HPLC, UHPLC, and SFC systems [34] [35]
• Energy Integration: The inclusion of instrument energy consumption addresses a significant oversight in other metrics, which is particularly important at the analytical scale where instrument energy can account for the majority of emissions [37]
• Practical Optimization Guidance: The color-coding of score components (yellow and red) highlights areas where the method could be improved, such as reducing instrument energy by shortening run time [35]
• Comparative Functionality: The numerical output enables direct comparison between methods during development, encouraging analysts to implement greener approaches [34] [28]

However, AMGS has limitations, including its current restriction to liquid chromatography and SFC methods (though GC support is planned for 2026) and its lack of assessment for mobile phase additives [35] [28].

Experimental Validation of AMGS

Case Study: Method Modernization for Naproxen Analysis

A comprehensive study applying AMGS to the USP monograph method for naproxen sodium tablets demonstrated the practical utility of this metric for evaluating method improvements. The study modernized the original HPLC method to UHPLC and UPLC platforms and calculated AMGS values for each approach [38].

Table 2: AMGS Comparison for Naproxen Analysis Across Chromatographic Platforms

Parameter	HPLC Method	UHPLC Method	UPLC Method
Flow Rate	1.2 mL/min	0.6 mL/min	0.4 mL/min
Run Time	8 minutes	4 minutes	1 minute
Injection Volume	20 μL	10 μL	2 μL
Solvent Consumption/Batch	~77 mL	~38 mL	~6 mL
Instrument Energy Score	High	Medium	Low
Total AMGS	110	<30	<30

The results demonstrated that modernization to more efficient chromatographic platforms reduced the AMGS by approximately 73% or more, primarily driven by reductions in run time and solvent usage [38]. This validation confirms that AMGS effectively captures the environmental benefits of method optimization and modernization.

Case Study: SFC vs. HPLC Greenness Comparison

Research comparing the greenness of reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC) and supercritical fluid chromatography (SFC) using both life cycle assessment (LCA) and AMGS demonstrated the importance of considering instrumental energy consumption alongside solvent usage [37].

The study found that SFC separations at low flow rates (<3 mL/min) performed unfavorably compared to comparable RP-HPLC separations despite the greener solvent profile of carbon dioxide. This counterintuitive result highlights the value of the comprehensive assessment provided by AMGS, which accounts for the additional instrumentation and energy requirements of SFC systems. The research concluded that SFC separations were generally favorable or comparable to RP-HPLC only when the SFC separations were faster, offsetting the higher instrumental energy demands [37].

Experimental Protocol for AMGS Assessment

For researchers seeking to implement AMGS evaluation, the following experimental protocol provides a systematic approach:

• Method Parameters Documentation:

  • Record instrument type (HPLC, UHPLC, UPLC)
  • Note flow rate, run time, and injection volume
  • Document mobile phase composition precisely
  • Record column dimensions and particle size [38]

• Sample Preparation Documentation:

  • Volume of sample diluent used
  • Volume of stock solutions prepared
  • Number of injections required for system suitability and samples [35] [38]

• AMGS Calculator Input:

  • Access the free AMGS calculator on the ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable website [40]
  • Input all documented parameters
  • Select appropriate solvent options from dropdown menus
  • For additives not in the database, select the closest equivalent [38]

• Results Interpretation:

  • Note total AMGS (lower = greener)
  • Review color-coded component scores to identify improvement opportunities
  • Compare with alternative method configurations [35]

• Optimization Implementation:

  • Apply strategies to reduce the highest component score
  • Consider cycle time in addition to run time for further optimization [36]

Research Reagent Solutions Toolkit

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Green Chromatographic Method Development

Item	Function	Green Considerations
Carbonated Water-Based Eluents [36]	Mobile phase for chiral separations	Reduces retention and sharpens peaks; UV and MS compatible
Narrow-Diameter Columns with Superficially Porous Particles [36]	Stationary phase for separations	Reduces solvent consumption and analysis time
Ethanol-Water Mobile Phases [39]	Alternative to acetonitrile-based mobile phases	Biodegradable and less toxic than acetonitrile
Ion Chromatography Eluent Reservoir [36]	Mobile phase preparation for carbonated eluents	Enables consistent pressurization for carbonated mobile phases
ACS GCI PR Solvent Selection Guide [40]	Solvent choice guidance	Provides EHS scores for informed solvent selection

The Analytical Method Greenness Score provides a validated, comprehensive metric for assessing the environmental impact of chromatographic methods. Its unique incorporation of instrument energy consumption alongside solvent-related factors addresses a critical gap in greenness assessment, particularly for analytical-scale separations where instrument energy can dominate the environmental footprint. Experimental validations across multiple studies confirm that AMGS effectively captures the sustainability benefits of method optimization, modernization, and technique selection.

While AMGS represents a significant advancement in green analytical chemistry, the metric continues to evolve. Recent research has proposed valuable modifications, such as incorporating cycle time into calculations, which further enhances its accuracy and practical utility for method optimization. When used in conjunction with other greenness assessment tools that provide complementary perspectives, AMGS empowers researchers to make informed decisions that balance analytical performance with environmental responsibility, advancing the pharmaceutical industry's sustainability goals without compromising data quality or regulatory compliance.

The escalating global issue of pharmaceutical contamination in aquatic environments has made the monitoring of these emerging contaminants a critical scientific and public health priority [41]. The estimation of the average annual consumption of pharmaceuticals is approximately 15 g per capita, translating to about 1.2 × 10⁵ tons per year globally, with a substantial fraction (10–20%) of ingested pharmaceuticals excreted largely unchanged into wastewater [41]. This continuous introduction of bioactive substances into ecosystems necessitates highly sensitive and reliable monitoring methods.

In response, Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has emerged as a transformative approach, focusing on developing methodologies that minimize environmental impact through reduced consumption of hazardous substances, energy, and waste generation [42]. The concept has since evolved beyond purely environmental considerations to include White Analytical Chemistry (WAC), which seeks a balanced compromise between method greenness (environmental impact), redness (analytical performance), and blueness (practical applicability) [43] [4]. This holistic framework ensures that sustainable methods maintain the rigorous performance standards required for trace pharmaceutical analysis while remaining practically viable for routine implementation.

This case study objectively evaluates a published UHPLC-MS/MS method for detecting carbamazepine, caffeine, and ibuprofen in water and wastewater [41] using multiple greenness assessment tools. We demonstrate a structured approach to validate sustainability claims, compare the method's environmental performance against conventional approaches, and provide researchers with a validated protocol for comprehensive greenness assessment in analytical chemistry.

The evaluated UHPLC-MS/MS method represents a significant advancement in sustainable pharmaceutical monitoring with several optimized features [41]. The method employs a short analysis time of 10 minutes, coupled with an economical sample preparation strategy that eliminates the energy- and solvent-intensive evaporation step typically required after solid-phase extraction (SPE). This strategic modification directly reduces solvent consumption and waste generation while maintaining analytical integrity.

The method targets three indicator pharmaceuticals: carbamazepine (an anticonvulsant noted for its environmental persistence), caffeine (a widely consumed psychoactive substance serving as a marker for domestic wastewater contamination), and ibuprofen (a common non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug representing a broad class of frequently detected pharmaceuticals) [41]. Their selection reflects both their environmental prevalence and their value as indicators of anthropogenic impact on aquatic systems.

Experimental Protocol

Sample Preparation: Water and wastewater samples underwent solid-phase extraction without subsequent evaporation. This omission represents a key green improvement, as evaporation steps typically require substantial energy input and can lead to analyte loss or degradation [41].

Instrumental Analysis: Analysis was performed using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS). The UHPLC system provides superior separation efficiency compared to conventional HPLC, while MS/MS detection offers the selectivity and sensitivity required for trace-level determination in complex environmental matrices [41].

Method Validation: The method was rigorously validated according to International Council for Harmonization (ICH) guidelines Q2(R2), demonstrating specificity, linearity (correlation coefficients ≥ 0.999), precision (RSD < 5.0%), and accuracy (recovery rates ranging from 77 to 160%) [41]. The limits of detection and quantification established meet the requirements for trace environmental analysis, with LODs of 100 ng/L for carbamazepine, 200 ng/L for ibuprofen, and 300 ng/L for caffeine [41].

Table 1: Analytical Performance Data for the UHPLC-MS/MS Method

Analyte	LOD (ng/L)	LOQ (ng/L)	Linear Range	Precision (RSD%)	Accuracy (% Recovery)
Carbamazepine	100	300	Not specified	<5.0	77-160
Ibuprofen	200	600	Not specified	<5.0	77-160
Caffeine	300	1000	Not specified	<5.0	77-160

Greenness Assessment Methodology

Assessment Tools and Protocols

To ensure a comprehensive evaluation, we employed four established greenness assessment metrics, each with distinct strengths and focus areas [42] [44]. This multi-tool approach mitigates the limitations inherent in any single assessment system and provides a more nuanced understanding of the method's environmental performance.

AGREE (Analytical GREEnness Metric): This tool employs a 0-1 scoring system based on all 12 principles of GAC, providing a single comprehensive score with supportive graphical output [42]. The assessment considers factors including sample preparation, sample size, energy consumption, and waste generation [44]. We used the open-access AGREE software, inputting parameters for the UHPLC-MS/MS method including energy consumption per sample, amount of waste generated, and toxicity of reagents.

GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index): This semi-quantitative tool uses a color-coded pictogram to evaluate the entire analytical workflow across five stages: sample collection, preservation, preparation, transportation, and analysis [44]. Each segment is assigned a color from green (low environmental impact) to red (high environmental impact). We created the GAPI assessment by evaluating each step of the published method against the tool's criteria.

Analytical Eco-Scale: This penalty-point-based system quantifies deviation from an ideal green method by assigning penalty points for hazardous reagents, energy consumption, and waste generation [42] [44]. A higher score (closer to 100) indicates better environmental performance. We calculated the Eco-Scale score by subtracting penalty points for the method's use of organic solvents, energy-intensive instrumentation, and waste generation.

BAGI (Blue Applicability Grade Index): As a complement to greenness metrics, BAGI evaluates practical applicability across ten parameters including analysis type, throughput, cost, and operational simplicity [42]. This tool addresses the "blue" component of White Analytical Chemistry, ensuring that environmental improvements don't compromise practical utility. We assessed the method against BAGI criteria such as equipment availability, sample preparation complexity, and analytical throughput.

Assessment Workflow

The following diagram illustrates the systematic workflow employed for the multi-tool greenness assessment:

Results and Comparative Analysis

Greenness Assessment Scores

The UHPLC-MS/MS method demonstrated strong environmental performance across all assessment tools, with particularly high scores in solvent reduction and waste minimization. The elimination of the evaporation step in sample preparation contributed significantly to its green credentials by reducing both energy consumption and potential solvent emissions [41].

Table 2: Multi-Tool Greenness Assessment Results

Assessment Tool	Score	Interpretation	Key Strengths	Key Limitations
AGREE	0.76/1.00	Good greenness	Sample preparation without evaporation, minimal solvent use	Energy consumption of UHPLC-MS/MS
GAPI	4/15 red segments	Moderate greenness	Direct sample preparation, miniaturization potential	Hazardous solvents in mobile phase
Analytical Eco-Scale	78/100	Good greenness	Reduced waste generation, no derivatization	Organic solvent usage, energy consumption
BAGI	75/100	Good applicability	High throughput, automation potential	Specialist equipment required

Comparative Analysis with Conventional Methods

When benchmarked against traditional approaches, the UHPLC-MS/MS method shows marked improvements in sustainability metrics. Conventional methods often employ larger column dimensions (e.g., 250 × 4.6 mm), longer run times, and more extensive sample preparation with evaporation steps [45]. The following diagram illustrates the RGB model balance achieved by the assessed method compared to traditional approaches:

The method demonstrates that environmental improvements need not compromise analytical performance. The maintenance of strong analytical capabilities (red) while enhancing greenness and maintaining practicality represents the balanced approach advocated by White Analytical Chemistry [43] [4].

Critical Analysis of Assessment Tools

Our multi-tool assessment revealed significant variations in how different metrics evaluate the same method. While AGREE provided the most comprehensive evaluation of GAC principles, GAPI offered valuable visual representation of hotspots for environmental impact throughout the workflow. The Analytical Eco-Scale delivered a straightforward numerical score useful for quick comparisons, while BAGI importantly addressed the practical implementation aspects often overlooked in purely environmental assessments.

This variability underscores the importance of the Good Evaluation Practice (GEP) rules proposed by Nowak [4], which advocate for using multiple assessment tools with varied structures to compensate for individual limitations and provide a more reliable overall picture. Specifically, our assessment adhered to GEP principles by:

• Using quantitative indicators based on empirical data from the method description [4]
• Combining multiple metrics with different structures and scoring approaches
• Providing transparent documentation of all assessment parameters
• Contextualizing results with comparative analysis against conventional methods
• Acknowledging inherent limitations of each assessment tool

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Materials for Green UHPLC-MS/MS

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions and Materials

Item	Function	Green Considerations
Solid-Phase Extraction (SPE) System	Sample clean-up and analyte enrichment	Enables solvent reduction through eliminated evaporation step [41]
Superficially Porous Particles (SPP) Columns	Stationary phase for separation	Lower backpressure, faster analysis, reduced solvent consumption [46]
Ethanol or Bio-Based Solvents	Mobile phase component	Lower toxicity and better biodegradability vs. acetonitrile [45]
Dimethyl Carbonate	Alternative green solvent	Bio-derived, low toxicity, suitable for reversed-phase LC [46]
UHPLC-MS/MS System	Instrumental analysis	High efficiency enables shorter columns and faster runs [41]
Greenness Assessment Software	Method evaluation	AGREE, GAPI, and BAGI tools for objective sustainability assessment [42]

This comprehensive assessment demonstrates that the UHPLC-MS/MS method for trace pharmaceutical analysis represents a significant step toward more sustainable analytical practices. The method achieves an effective balance between analytical performance, environmental impact, and practical applicability – the three pillars of White Analytical Chemistry.

The elimination of the evaporation step in sample preparation emerges as a particularly impactful modification, reducing both energy consumption and solvent waste without compromising analytical performance. When evaluated across multiple assessment tools, the method consistently shows improved greenness profiles compared to conventional approaches, while maintaining the sensitivity and selectivity required for trace-level pharmaceutical determination in complex environmental matrices.

This case study also validates the importance of using multiple assessment tools to obtain a nuanced understanding of method greenness. The varying scores and perspectives provided by AGREE, GAPI, Analytical Eco-Scale, and BAGI collectively offer a more comprehensive evaluation than any single metric could provide independently.

For researchers pursuing sustainable analytical method development, we recommend: (1) incorporating greenness assessment early in method development cycles; (2) employing at least two complementary assessment tools to mitigate individual limitations; and (3) considering the practical applicability (blue component) alongside environmental impact to ensure methods are adoptable in routine laboratory settings. As regulatory frameworks and pharmacopeias increasingly emphasize sustainability, such comprehensive assessment protocols will become essential components of analytical method validation and reporting.

The development of analytical methods that align with the principles of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has become a pivotal focus in modern pharmaceutical analysis. This case study examines the validation of a green Reverse-Phase High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (RP-HPLC) method for the analysis of Upadacitinib, a selective Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor [47]. The research demonstrates how green chemistry principles can be successfully integrated into pharmaceutical quality control while maintaining compliance with International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) guidelines, providing a model for sustainable analytical practices in drug development [47] [42].

Janus Kinase Inhibitors and Analytical Challenges

Janus kinase inhibitors represent a crucial class of therapeutics for immune-mediated inflammatory conditions. These oral small molecules, including Upadacitinib, exhibit significant inter-individual pharmacokinetic variability and a narrow therapeutic index, necessitating precise analytical methods for their quantification [48]. The complex molecular structure of JAK inhibitors, combined with the need to monitor both the active pharmaceutical ingredient and its degradation products, presents substantial analytical challenges that must be addressed while minimizing environmental impact [47] [48].

The JAK-STAT Signaling Pathway

JAK inhibitors target the Janus kinase-signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK-STAT) signaling pathway, which plays a fundamental role in immune responses and inflammation. The pathway transmits signals from cytokines and growth factors to the nucleus, regulating processes such as cell proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis [47] [49]. The diagram below illustrates this signaling mechanism and the site of inhibition.

Experimental Protocol and Methodology

Materials and Instrumentation

The development and validation of the green RP-HPLC method for Upadacitinib utilized specific materials and instrumentation to ensure both analytical performance and environmental sustainability [47].

Table 1: Key Research Reagent Solutions and Instrumentation

Item Category	Specific Description	Function/Purpose
Chemical Reagents	HPLC-grade Acetonitrile, 0.1% Formic Acid	Mobile phase components for chromatographic separation
Analytical Column	COSMOSIL C18 (250 mm × 4.6 mm)	Stationary phase for compound separation
HPLC System	Jasco HPLC with PU-2089 Plus pump, AS-4050 autosampler	Liquid chromatography separation and analysis
Detection System	UV-4075 Plus detector at 290 nm	Quantification of Upadacitinib
Data Acquisition	ChromNAV software	System control and data processing

Method Development and Optimization

The analytical method was developed with a focus on green chemistry principles while maintaining robust analytical performance. The mobile phase consisted of acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid in a ratio of 60:40 (v/v), with a flow rate of 0.8 mL/min [47]. Detection was performed at 290 nm, where Upadacitinib demonstrates optimal absorbance. The method employed an isocratic elution mode, simplifying the separation process and reducing solvent consumption compared to gradient methods [47].

Sample Preparation

Sample preparation followed an environmentally conscious approach with minimal solvent usage. Tablet powder equivalent to 2.5 mg of Upadacitinib was dissolved in 50 mL of mobile phase, followed by sonication and dilution to obtain a final concentration of 5 ppm [47]. This straightforward preparation method avoided extensive sample processing and reduced the consumption of organic solvents.

Forced Degradation Studies

Forced degradation studies were conducted to establish the stability-indicating properties of the method. Upadacitinib was subjected to various stress conditions, including acidic (0.1N HCl), alkaline (0.1N NaOH), oxidative (3% H₂O₂), thermal, and photolytic environments [47]. The method effectively separated degradation products from the parent compound, demonstrating its specificity and ability to quantify Upadacitinib in the presence of its degradation impurities.

Validation Results and Performance Data

The green RP-HPLC method was comprehensively validated according to ICH guidelines, confirming its reliability for the quantification of Upadacitinib in pharmaceutical dosage forms [47].

System Suitability and Validation Parameters

System suitability was verified through five replicate injections of a 5 ppm Upadacitinib solution, showing a consistent retention time of 2.432 minutes [47]. The method validation encompassed all critical parameters required for pharmaceutical analysis.

Table 2: Method Validation Parameters and Results

Validation Parameter	Experimental Results	ICH Compliance
Linearity Range	2.5-7.5 ppm	R² = 0.9996
Precision (% RSD)	< 2% (Intra-day and Inter-day)	Meets ICH criteria
LOD	0.298 ppm	Based on standard deviation of Y-intercept
LOQ	0.905 ppm	Based on standard deviation of Y-intercept
Specificity	Resolved degradation peaks in forced degradation studies	Confirmed stability-indicating capability
Robustness	Acceptable system suitability with deliberate variations	Meets ICH criteria

Forced Degradation Profile

The forced degradation studies revealed Upadacitinib's susceptibility to various stress conditions, with significant degradation observed under acidic (15.75%), alkaline (22.14%), and oxidative (11.79%) conditions [47]. The drug demonstrated stability under thermal and photolytic stress. The method successfully separated the degradation products from the active pharmaceutical ingredient, confirming its stability-indicating properties.

Greenness Assessment Using Multiple Metrics

The environmental impact of the developed RP-HPLC method was systematically evaluated using three established greenness assessment tools: ComplexGAPI, AGREE, and AMGS [47]. This multi-metric approach provided a comprehensive evaluation of the method's environmental performance, aligning with the principles of Green Analytical Chemistry.

Comparison of Greenness Assessment Tools

Various metrics are available for evaluating the environmental impact of analytical methods, each with distinct approaches and output formats. The table below compares the major greenness assessment tools used in pharmaceutical analysis.

Table 3: Comparison of Greenness Assessment Metrics

Assessment Tool	Main Focus	Output Format	Key Features
Analytical Eco-Scale	Solvent toxicity, energy, waste	Penalty-point-based score	Semi-quantitative, simple application
GAPI	Entire analytical workflow	Color-coded pictogram	Visual evaluation, no total score
Complex-GAPI	Includes pre-analytical steps	Extended pictogram	More comprehensive greenness coverage
AGREE	All 12 GAC principles	Radial chart (0-1 score)	Holistic single-score metric
BAGI	Method applicability	Pictogram + % score	Evaluates practical usability

The developed RP-HPLC method for Upadacitinib was evaluated using multiple metrics, which confirmed its eco-friendly nature [47]. The method's green characteristics include the use of a relatively benign mobile phase, reduced solvent consumption through a low flow rate (0.8 mL/min), and minimal sample preparation requirements.

Greenness Assessment Workflow

The evaluation of an analytical method's environmental impact follows a systematic process utilizing multiple assessment tools, as demonstrated in the Upadacitinib case study. The workflow below illustrates this comprehensive greenness validation approach.

Comparative Analysis with Alternative Methods

Advantages Over Conventional HPLC Methods

The green RP-HPLC method for Upadacitinib demonstrates significant improvements over conventional HPLC approaches in terms of environmental impact and sustainability [47]. Traditional methods often utilize larger volumes of hazardous solvents, generate substantial chemical waste, and require more energy-intensive operations [42]. The developed method addresses these limitations through optimized solvent selection and reduced consumption.

Comparison with Other JAK Inhibitor Analytical Methods

Analytical methods for other JAK inhibitors provide valuable points of comparison. For tofacitinib, researchers developed an RP-HPLC method with sensitivity reaching 50 ng/mL, validated for analysis in nanoparticles and skin matrices [50]. For abrocitinib, a stability-indicating method was developed using a Quality by Design (QbD) approach to quantify isomers and organic impurities [51]. The Upadacitinib green RP-HPLC method distinguishes itself through its comprehensive greenness assessment and minimal environmental impact.

Position in the Evolving Landscape of Green Analytical Chemistry

The validated method represents the growing integration of sustainability principles into pharmaceutical analysis. Recent reviews highlight innovations in green HPLC, including eco-friendly solvent systems, miniaturized instrumentation, and greener sample preparation techniques [42]. The Upadacitinib method aligns with these trends, particularly through its reduced solvent consumption and avoidance of hazardous reagents.

This case study demonstrates the successful development and validation of a green RP-HPLC method for Upadacitinib that balances analytical performance with environmental responsibility. The method fulfills all ICH validation requirements while incorporating green chemistry principles, as confirmed by multiple assessment metrics.

The research provides a validated framework for implementing green analytical practices in pharmaceutical quality control, potentially applicable to other JAK inhibitors and small molecule therapeutics. Future directions include further method miniaturization, exploration of alternative green solvents, and the development of standardized greenness assessment protocols for wider adoption in pharmaceutical analysis.

Solving Common Challenges and Strategically Improving Greenness Scores

Addressing Tool Proliferation and Selecting the Right Metric for Your Goal

The field of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) has seen rapid growth, leading to the development of numerous assessment tools to evaluate the environmental impact of analytical methods. This proliferation, while a sign of a vibrant research field, presents a significant challenge for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals. With tools ranging from HPLC-EAT and AES to GAPI, AGREE, HEXAGON, and BAGI, selecting the appropriate metric for a specific goal becomes complex [52]. These tools differ substantially in their scope, assessment criteria, and methodological approach, from qualitative scoring systems to quantitative assessments [52]. This guide provides an objective comparison of leading sustainability assessment tools, framed within the broader thesis of validating greenness scores, to empower professionals in making informed decisions tailored to their specific research objectives.

Comparative Analysis of Major Sustainability Assessment Tools

A critical step in addressing tool proliferation is understanding the specific characteristics and applications of each available metric. The following table summarizes the core features of several key tools used in Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) and Green Sample Preparation (GSP) [52].

Table 1: Overview of Key Green Chemistry Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Primary Scope / Focus	Assessment Criteria & Approach	Key Differentiators
GAPI	Analytical methods	Qualitative scoring system	-
AGREE	Analytical methods	Quantitative assessment	-
AGREEprep	Sample preparation	Quantitative assessment	Green Sample Preparation (GSP) focus
HEXAGON	Analytical process	Comprehensive evaluation	-
RGB Model & Evolutions	Analytical methods	-	-
HPLC-EAT	HPLC methods	-	-
AES	Analytical methods	-	-
AMVI	Analytical methods	-	-
AMGS	Analytical methods	-	-
LCA	Broad environmental impact	Quantifies environmental impact	Broader scope beyond analytical chemistry
BAGI	Analytical methods	-	-
SUSTAIN	Methods, processes, initiatives	SDG-based holistic assessment [53]	Maps impacts onto all 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [53]

Quantitative Benchmarking of Tool Outputs: A Case Study

To move beyond theoretical comparison and objectively benchmark performance, it is essential to apply different tools to the same initiatives. The SUSTAIN tool, a universal scoring tool based on the 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), provides a clear framework for such a comparison [53]. In a practical application, SUSTAIN was used to evaluate three major energy access initiatives, yielding the following normalized percentage scores [53]:

Table 2: SUSTAIN Tool Application - Energy Initiative Scores

Energy Access Initiative	Normalized SUSTAIN Score (%)
Power Africa	50.00
SE4All	85.29
Climate Finance Initiatives	82.35

The SUSTAIN scoring methodology is rigorous and transparent. Each of the 17 SDGs is assessed on a five-point ordinal scale: +2 (Strongly Fulfill), +1 (Fulfill), 0 (Neutral), -1 (Violate), and -2 (Strongly Violate) [53]. The total raw score is summed and normalized to a percentage of the maximum possible score (34 points) [53]. The formula is expressed as: $$\text{SUSTAIN Score} (\%) = \frac{\text{Total points scored}}{\text{Maximum possible score}} \times 100$$ [53]

Scoring is conducted by independent assessors using data from official reports and literature, with discrepancies resolved through consensus to ensure reliability [53].

Experimental Protocols for Tool Validation and Application

Validating the outputs of any greenness scoring tool is paramount to ensuring the reliability and relevance of the results. The following protocol outlines a generalizable methodology for conducting and validating a comparative assessment of sustainability tools.

Protocol for Comparative Tool Validation

Objective: To objectively compare the performance, output consistency, and practical applicability of different green chemistry assessment tools when applied to a standardized method or process.

Materials & Reagents:

• Software/Access: Licenses or access to the target assessment tools (e.g., AGREE, GAPI, SUSTAIN software).
• Data Collection: Standardized dataset describing the method/process under evaluation, including energy consumption, solvent types and volumes, waste streams, and potential social and economic impacts.
• Documentation: Structured spreadsheet for data input and results collation.

Methodology:

• Selection & Definition: Select the analytical method or industrial process to be evaluated. Clearly define the system boundaries (e.g., cradle-to-gate, cradle-to-grave).
• Data Compilation: Gather all quantitative and qualitative data required for the assessment. This includes amounts of chemicals, energy inputs, emissions, waste generation, and safety data sheets.
• Independent Tool Application: Input the compiled data into each selected assessment tool according to its specific guidelines. For tools like SUSTAIN, this involves mapping each data point onto the relevant SDG and assigning a consensus score [53].
• Results Aggregation: Collect the output scores, profiles, or dashboards from each tool into a comparative table.
• Statistical & Trend Analysis: Analyze the results for consistency, identifying areas of agreement and divergence between the tools. This may involve sensitivity analysis to understand how changes in input data affect the final scores.

Workflow for Selecting the Right Assessment Tool

The decision-making process for selecting an appropriate metric can be visualized as a logical pathway, ensuring the tool aligns with the research goal.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Successful application and validation of green metrics rely on a set of fundamental "research reagents" — in this context, conceptual tools and data sources.

Table 3: Essential Reagents for Green Metric Validation Research

Research Reagent	Function & Application
UN SDG Framework	Provides the universal set of 17 goals and targets that form the foundational criteria for tools like SUSTAIN, enabling a holistic environmental, social, and economic assessment [53].
Standardized Data Inventory Template	A structured spreadsheet for systematically compiling all input data (e.g., solvent volumes, energy consumption, waste) required by various assessment tools, ensuring consistent inputs for comparative studies.
Consensus Scoring Rubric	A predefined guide, such as the 5-point ordinal scale (-2 to +2) used in SUSTAIN, to standardize scoring among multiple independent assessors and improve the reliability of qualitative judgments [53].
Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) Database	Provides validated, secondary data on the environmental impacts of materials and energy sources, which is crucial for comprehensive tools like Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) when primary data is unavailable [52].

Navigating the landscape of green chemistry assessment tools requires a strategic approach grounded in a clear understanding of one's research goals. This guide has provided a comparative framework and validation protocols to aid in this process. The key to selecting the right metric lies in aligning the tool's scope, methodology, and output with the specific question being asked — whether it's optimizing a sample preparation step, communicating a holistic sustainability profile, or meeting regulatory requirements. By applying the structured workflow and validation protocols outlined here, researchers and drug development professionals can make defensible, data-driven decisions, thereby advancing the core mission of sustainable science.

Interpreting Conflicting Results from Different Assessment Tools

The push for sustainable practices in analytical chemistry and pharmaceutical development has led to the creation of numerous greenness assessment tools. While these tools share the common goal of evaluating environmental impact, they often employ different criteria and scoring mechanisms, leading to conflicting results that can confuse researchers and hinder method selection. This guide objectively compares the performance of major assessment tools using experimental data, providing scientists with a framework for validating greenness scores across multiple evaluation systems.

Various tools have been developed to quantify the environmental impact of analytical methods, each with distinct approaches, criteria, and scoring systems. Understanding these fundamental differences is crucial for interpreting conflicting results.

Table 1: Key Characteristics of Major Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Assessment Approach	Scoring System	Key Assessed Parameters	Output Format
NEMI	Qualitative	Pass/Fail (4 quadrants)	PBT chemicals, hazardous waste, corrosivity, waste generation [54]	Pictogram with green/white quadrants
Analytical Eco-Scale	Semi-quantitative	Penalty points (ideal=100)	Reagent toxicity, energy consumption, waste [54]	Numerical score (≥75=excellent, <50=poor)
AGREE	Quantitative	0-1 scale	12 GAC principles	Circular pictogram with score
ChlorTox	Quantitative	Comparative to chloroform	Chemical risk based on SDS hazards and mass [54]	Numerical score (lower=greener)
RGB Model/White Analytical Chemistry	Comprehensive quantitative	Multiple scores (R,G,B)	Analytical efficiency (Red), ecological impact (Green), practicality/cost (Blue) [19] [22]	Combined whiteness score (higher=better)

Experimental Data: Tool Comparison in Pharmaceutical Analysis

Case Study 1: HPLC Methods for Paclitaxel Quantification

A 2025 study evaluated nine HPLC-based methods for paclitaxel quantification using seven assessment tools, revealing significant variability in results [54].

Table 2: Greenness Scores for Paclitaxel HPLC Methods Across Different Tools

Method	NEMI Profile	Analytical Eco-Scale	SPMS	ChlorTox	RGBfast	BAGI
Method 1	Not provided	Not provided	Not provided	Not provided	Not provided	Not provided
Method 3	Favorable	72.5	Favorable	Lower risk	Balanced RGB	72.5
Method 5	Favorable	90 (Excellent)	Favorable	Lower risk	Balanced RGB	Not provided
Methods 6, 8, 9	Unfavorable	Lower scores	Unfavorable	Higher risk	Poor balance	Lower scores

Experimental Protocol: The study applied each assessment tool to the same set of nine HPLC methods for paclitaxel quantification. Methods varied in mobile phase composition, energy consumption, and waste generation. Each tool was applied according to its standard protocol: NEMI (pass/fail on four criteria), Analytical Eco-Scale (deduction from 100), SPMS (weighted sustainability parameters), ChlorTox (risk relative to chloroform), RGBfast (automated assessment of six criteria), and BAGI (practicality focus) [54].

Key Finding: Methods 3 and 5 consistently scored as the most sustainable across multiple tools, demonstrating concordance when methods exhibit strong greenness characteristics. Methods 6, 8, and 9 consistently required optimization, particularly in hazardous material usage and waste management [54].

Case Study 2: HPLC-DAD Method for Donepezil HCl and Curcumin

A 2025 study developed an eco-friendly HPLC-DAD method for simultaneous determination of Donepezil HCl and Curcumin in nanoliposomes and evaluated it using multiple assessment tools [22]. The method utilized a Zobrax Eclipse Plus C18 column with gradient elution of phosphate buffer (pH 3.2) and ethanol, avoiding traditional acetonitrile-based mobile phases.

Results: The method showed high greenness scores across AGREE and MoGAPI tools and exhibited strong "whiteness" in the RGB model, balancing analytical efficiency (Red), ecological impact (Green), and practical economic efficiency (Blue) [22]. This demonstrates successful development of a method that performs well across multiple assessment systems.

Case Study 3: RGBsynt Model for Mechanochemical vs. Solution-Based Reactions

A 2025 study introduced the RGBsynt model, specifically designed for evaluating chemical synthesis methods, and applied it to compare 17 solution-based procedures with their mechanochemical alternatives [19].

Experimental Protocol: The RGBsynt model assessed six key parameters: yield (R1), product purity (R2), E-factor (G1/B1), ChlorTox (G2), time-efficiency (B2), and energy demand (G3/B3). The model was implemented in an Excel spreadsheet where users input parameter values, with automated evaluation and visualization of results [19].

Key Finding: The evaluation clearly indicated the superiority of mechanochemistry over solution-based methods in both reducing environmental impact (greenness) and overall potential (whiteness), demonstrating consistent results across the multiple parameters assessed [19].

Interpreting Discrepancies: Why Tools Conflict

Fundamental Differences in Assessment Approach

Assessment tools conflict primarily because they measure different aspects of environmental impact using varying methodologies:

• Scope of Assessment: Tools like NEMI focus primarily on environmental factors, while the RGB model incorporates analytical effectiveness and practical considerations, creating a more comprehensive "whiteness" assessment [19] [22].
• Quantification Methods: Qualitative tools (NEMI) provide pass/fail results, while quantitative tools (Analytical Eco-Scale, AGREE) offer numerical scores, creating apparent conflicts when methods pass qualitative checks but score poorly quantitatively [54].
• Reference Points: Some tools use absolute reference points (Analytical Eco-Scale ideal=100), while others employ relative comparisons (ChlorTox compares to chloroform) [54].

Diagram 1: Framework for understanding conflicting assessment tool results. Tools prioritize different factors, leading to varying conclusions.

Method-Specific Limitations and Strengths

Each tool possesses inherent limitations that contribute to conflicting assessments:

• NEMI provides simple visualization but lacks granularity, potentially overlooking significant environmental impacts [54].
• Analytical Eco-Scale offers detailed assessment but relies on subjective penalty point assignments [54].
• RGB Model provides comprehensive evaluation but requires more complex implementation and interpretation [19] [22].

Strategic Framework for Resolving Conflicting Results

Multi-Tool Assessment Protocol

Based on experimental evidence, the following protocol ensures comprehensive evaluation:

• Primary Screening: Use simple qualitative tools (NEMI) for initial method screening.
• Quantitative Analysis: Apply semi-quantitative (Analytical Eco-Scale) and quantitative (AGREE, ChlorTox) tools for detailed comparison.
• Holistic Assessment: Implement comprehensive models (RGB, RGBsynt) for final evaluation of promising methods.
• Contextual Decision-Making: Select methods based on laboratory priorities (ecological impact, cost, analytical performance).

Validation Through Experimental Verification

Experimental validation remains crucial for verifying assessment tool predictions:

• A/A Testing: Verify experimental setup and identify system errors before full evaluation [55] [56].
• Peer Review: Engage colleagues to review analysis and challenge interpretations, reducing confirmation bias [55].
• Method Replication: Reproduce surprising results to confirm findings, as demonstrated by Bing's color experiment replication with 32 million users [55].

Diagram 2: Strategic framework for multi-tool assessment with verification steps to resolve conflicting results.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Solutions

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for Greenness Assessment Studies

Reagent/Solution	Function in Assessment	Application Context
Ethanol	Green solvent alternative	Replaces acetonitrile in HPLC mobile phases [22] [57]
Phosphate Buffers	Mobile phase component	Provides pH control without hazardous chemicals [22]
Formic Acid	Mobile phase modifier	Enhances separation while reducing environmental impact [57]
Chloroform	Reference standard	Baseline for ChlorTox scale calculations [54]
Water	Green solvent	Primary solvent in environmentally-friendly methods [57]

Conflicting results from different greenness assessment tools stem from their diverse scopes, methodologies, and priorities rather than from inherent flaws in the tools themselves. By employing a systematic multi-tool approach with experimental verification, researchers can make informed decisions that balance environmental impact, analytical performance, and practical considerations. The RGB model and its derivatives represent a promising direction for comprehensive method evaluation, integrating greenness with functionality to provide a more complete picture of method sustainability. As the field evolves, standardization of assessment protocols and increased tool harmonization will further enhance the reliability and interpretability of greenness scores across pharmaceutical and analytical development.

In pharmaceutical development and manufacturing, solvents constitute the most significant portion of the environmental footprint, often accounting for the majority of mass input in synthetic processes. With increasing regulatory pressure and industry commitment to sustainability—exemplified by initiatives like AstraZeneca's goal for carbon-zero analytical laboratories by 2030—strategies for reducing solvent impact have become paramount [28]. The evaluation of these strategies is increasingly supported by quantitative greenness metrics, which provide a standardized framework for comparing the environmental performance of alternative technologies and processes. This guide objectively compares the efficacy of various solvent-waste reduction technologies, supported by experimental data and framed within the context of validating greenness scores across multiple assessment tools.

Comparative Analysis of Solvent Reduction Strategies

The following table summarizes the performance, advantages, and limitations of the primary technological strategies for mitigating solvent-related environmental impact.

Table 1: Comparison of Solvent Impact Reduction Strategies

Strategy	Key Performance Data	Advantages	Limitations/Challenges
On-Site Solvent Recycling [58]	Yields up to 95% of available solvent from waste streams; reduces virgin solvent use, waste transport, and disposal [58].	Maximizes resource efficiency; reduces cradle-to-grave liability and GHG emissions from production and transport [58].	Traditional units can be difficult to operate and maintain, potentially leading to underuse [58].
Alternative Separation Technologies (OSN) [59]	Permeate flux shows strong correlation with solvent properties (e.g., viscosity, surface tension); provides energy-efficient alternative to distillation [59].	Ceramic membranes offer high chemical and thermal stability without swelling; operates at lower temperatures than thermal processes [59].	Performance depends on complex solvent-membrane-solute interactions; predictive power requires advanced data-driven models [59].
Solvent Substitution (Aqueous & Less-Toxic) [60] [61]	Case Study (Franklin Paint): Eliminated ~150,000 lbs methanol, ~50,000 lbs xylene, and ~500,000 lbs toluene annually [60].	Reduces worker exposure to hazardous chemicals and lowers VOC emissions; often simplifies regulatory compliance [61].	Finding substitutes with equivalent cleaning or performance properties can be challenging; may require equipment modifications [61].
Computational Solvent Screening [62] [63]	Identified a class of tertiary amines with CO₂ absorption rates faster than standard MDEA; predicted solubilities in antisolvent crystallization for a pharmaceutical [62] [63].	Reduces extensive laboratory experimentation; enables in silico design of solvents with optimal properties (e.g., kinetics, solubility) [62].	Model accuracy depends on the quality of input data and parametrization; complex chemical interactions can be challenging to simulate [63].

Experimental Protocols for Validating Greenness

Protocol 1: Life Cycle Assessment of Chromatographic Methods

The Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS) provides a holistic metric for evaluating the environmental impact of analytical methods, such as those used in quality control [28].

• Objective: To quantify and compare the greenness of chromatographic methods based on solvent energy, EHS (Environment, Health, Safety) factors, and instrument energy consumption.
• Methodology:
  • System Boundary Definition: Cradle-to-grave assessment, including solvent production, method operation, and waste disposal.
  • Data Collection:
    • Solvent Consumption: Volume of mobile phase consumed per analysis, scaled to annual batch volume (e.g., 18 L/batch for a specific API) [28].
    • Energy Consumption: kWh used by the chromatograph during the method runtime.
    • EHS Profile: Toxicity, flammability, and environmental impact data for all solvents used.
  • Calculation: Input collected data into the AMGS calculator, which aggregates scores across the different dimensions to produce a single, comparable greenness score [28].
• Validation: Compare AMGS results with other metrics like Analytical Eco-Scale, GAPI, or AGREE to ensure consistent ranking of method greenness [28].

Protocol 2: Performance Validation of On-Site Solvent Recyclers

This protocol is designed to generate the data needed to validate the environmental benefits claimed by recycler manufacturers [58].

• Objective: To experimentally determine the recycling efficiency, solvent yield, and net environmental benefit of an on-site solvent recycling system.
• Methodology:
  • Baseline Measurement: Record the mass of solvent waste generated from a specific process (e.g., reactor cleaning) over a defined period.
  • Recycling Process: Distill the solvent waste using the on-site batch or continuous recycling unit.
  • Output Analysis:
    • Yield Calculation: Measure the mass of purified solvent recovered. Calculate the percentage yield relative to the waste input.
    • Purity Analysis: Use gas chromatography (GC) to confirm the purity of the recycled solvent is fit for its intended reuse.
    • Waste Residue: Measure the mass of concentrated still-bottom waste requiring off-site disposal [58].
  • Impact Calculation: Using real-time monitoring platforms (e.g., MyCleanPlanet), calculate the reduction in virgin solvent purchases, hazardous waste shipments, and associated GHG emissions [58].

Strategic Workflow for Solvent Impact Reduction

The following diagram visualizes the multi-faceted approach to reducing solvent environmental footprint, integrating technology, data, and validation.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Successful implementation of solvent reduction strategies relies on a suite of specialized reagents, materials, and software tools.

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents and Tools for Solvent Impact Reduction

Tool/Reagent	Function	Application Example
Advanced Solvent Recyclers [58]	On-site distillation of waste solvents into high-purity reusable material.	Recycling cleaning solvents (e.g., acetone, hexane) in manufacturing or R&D labs to >95% yield [58].
Ceramic Nanofiltration Membranes [59]	Separate molecules in organic solutions based on size and interaction, replacing energy-intensive distillations.	Concentration of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs) from organic extracts at room temperature [59].
Aqueous & Bio-Based Cleaners [60] [61]	Replace hazardous chlorinated solvents (e.g., TCE, DCM) in degreasing and cleaning operations.	Cleaning metal parts in manufacturing, eliminating worker exposure and hazardous waste generation [61].
Computational Screening Models [62] [63]	Predict solvent properties (e.g., CO₂ absorption kinetics, solubility) to identify optimal candidates in silico.	Identifying novel tertiary amines for carbon capture or optimal antisolvents for pharmaceutical crystallization [62] [63].
Greenness Assessment Tools [28]	Quantify the environmental impact of processes using metrics like AMGS, AGREE, or GAPI.	Comparing the sustainability of different analytical methods for quality control to select the greenest option [28].

A multi-pronged strategy incorporating on-site recycling, alternative separation technologies, solvent substitution, and computational screening is highly effective for mitigating the dominant environmental footprint of solvents. The success of these strategies can be quantitatively demonstrated through rigorous experimental protocols and life-cycle assessment. The ongoing validation of cross-cutting greenness metrics is critical, providing researchers and drug development professionals with trusted, standardized data to guide decision-making toward more sustainable pharmaceutical processes.

Optimizing Instrumental Parameters to Minimize Energy Consumption

The drive toward sustainability in the pharmaceutical industry has intensified focus on the environmental impact of all processes, including analytical methodologies. Instrumental analysis, particularly chromatography, consumes significant energy and generates hazardous waste. Frameworks like the Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS) enable the systematic evaluation and improvement of the sustainability of analytical methods. This guide compares approaches for optimizing instrumental parameters to minimize energy consumption, providing experimental data and protocols to validate greenness scores across multiple assessment tools.

The Imperative for Green Instrumental Analysis

Analytical methods are fundamental to pharmaceutical quality control and regulatory compliance. Their cumulative environmental impact is substantial; a case study on the rosuvastatin calcium manufacturing process reveals that approximately 18,000 liters of mobile phase are consumed and disposed of annually for the chromatographic analysis of this single active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) across an estimated 1,000 batches produced globally each year [28]. This underscores the critical need to optimize instrumental parameters to reduce energy consumption and waste.

Key Greenness Assessment Tools

Evaluating an analytical method's environmental impact involves assessing parameters like energy consumption, solvent usage, and waste production. Several tools facilitate this evaluation, each with specific criteria [28].

• Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS): A comprehensive metric that uniquely evaluates instrument energy consumption alongside the energy consumed in solvent production and disposal, and solvent safety/toxicity [28].
• Analytical Eco-Scale: A semi-quantitative tool that assigns penalty points for reagents, energy, and waste. A score of 100 is perfect; a higher score indicates a greener method [28].
• Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI): Uses a color-coded pictogram to represent the environmental impact of various stages of an analytical procedure [28].
• AGREE (Analytical GREEnness): Provides a visual radar chart and numerical score based on twelve principles of green chemistry [28].

Comparison of Greenness Assessment Tools

Table 1: A comparison of key tools used for assessing the greenness of analytical methods.

Tool Name	Assessment Approach	Key Strengths	Output Format
Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS)	Holistic metric evaluating solvent energy, solvent EHS (Environment, Health, Safety), and instrument energy consumption.	Provides a specific, multi-dimensional score ideal for chromatographic methods and internal benchmarking.	Numerical Score
Analytical Eco-Scale	Semi-quantitative; penalty points subtracted from a base score of 100.	Simple and effective for identifying specific areas for improvement.	Numerical Score
Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI)	Pictorial evaluation of each analytical step from sample collection to waste.	Offers a detailed, at-a-glance visual breakdown of the entire method's impact.	Color-coded Pictogram
AGREE	Comprehensive evaluation based on twelve green chemistry principles.	Visual, easily interpretable, and applicable to multiple analytical techniques.	Radar Chart & Numerical Score

Experimental Protocols for Parameter Optimization

Protocol 1: Optimizing Chromatographic Runtime and Flow Rate

This protocol aims to minimize energy consumption and solvent waste in High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) by optimizing key parameters.

• Objective: To determine the effect of method runtime and mobile phase flow rate on the AMGS, specifically the instrument energy and solvent energy components.
• Materials:
  • HPLC system with a variable-wavelength UV detector.
  • Standard C18 reversed-phase column (e.g., 150 mm x 4.6 mm, 5 µm).
  • Acetonitrile (HPLC grade), Water (HPLC grade).
  • Standard analyte solution (e.g., caffeine at 100 µg/mL).
• Methodology:
  • Prepare a mobile phase of acetonitrile and water (40:60 v/v).
  • Set the column oven temperature to 30°C and the detection wavelength to 254 nm.
  • Inject the standard solution (10 µL) using a set of varying parameters as shown in Table 2.
  • For each set of parameters, record the retention time of the analyte, the system backpressure, and the baseline resolution from any potential impurities.
  • Use the collected data (flow rate, runtime, solvent type, and volume) to calculate the AMGS for each method.
• Data Analysis: The optimal method achieves baseline separation of the analyte with the shortest runtime and lowest flow rate, leading to the highest AMGS.

Protocol 2: Evaluating the Impact of Column Temperature

This protocol investigates the trade-off between energy used for column heating and potential savings from reduced backpressure and improved efficiency.

• Objective: To analyze the effect of column temperature on separation efficiency, backpressure, and overall method greenness.
• Materials: (Same as Protocol 1)
• Methodology:
  • Using the optimal flow rate and gradient from Protocol 1, perform a series of injections at different column temperatures (e.g., 25°C, 35°C, 45°C, 55°C).
  • For each temperature, record the system backpressure, the retention time of the analyte, and the peak width (to calculate plate count).
• Data Analysis: Plot temperature against backpressure and efficiency. Determine if the gains in reduced runtime and solvent consumption at higher temperatures outweigh the increased energy consumption of the column oven.

Experimental Data and Comparison

Data generated from protocols like those above allows for a direct comparison of method greenness. The following table summarizes hypothetical but representative outcomes from optimizing a standard HPLC method.

Quantitative Comparison of HPLC Method Parameters

Table 2: Experimental data showing the effect of key parameter changes on method performance and greenness metrics.

Parameter Set	Flow Rate (mL/min)	Runtime (min)	Total Solvent Used (mL)	Backpressure (bar)	Resolution (Rs)	Estimated AMGS
Original Method	1.2	20	24	180	2.5	65
Reduced Flow	1.0	22	22	150	2.4	72
Optimized Gradient	1.2	12	14.4	185	2.5	78
Optimized Flow & Gradient	1.0	14	14	155	2.5	85

Workflow Visualization for Green Method Optimization

The following diagram illustrates a logical workflow for developing and validating an energy-efficient analytical method, incorporating greenness assessment at key stages.

Diagram 1: A logical workflow for developing an energy-efficient analytical method.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Key research reagents and materials essential for conducting experiments in green analytical chemistry.

Item Name	Function/Application	Green Considerations
HPLC Grade Water & Acetonitrile	Common mobile phase components in reversed-phase chromatography.	Acetonitrile has a higher environmental impact than alternatives like methanol or ethanol; its use should be minimized [28].
Reversed-Phase C18 Column	The stationary phase for separating non-polar to moderately polar compounds.	Using shorter columns or columns with smaller particle sizes can reduce runtime and solvent consumption.
Automated Method Development Software	Software that uses algorithms to efficiently scout optimal chromatographic conditions.	Drastically reduces the number of manual experiments required, saving significant solvents and energy [28].
Greenness Assessment Software (e.g., AGREE Calculator)	Tools to compute the greenness score of an analytical method.	Enables quantitative tracking and benchmarking of sustainability improvements over time [28].
Standard Reference Materials	High-purity chemicals used to validate method performance (accuracy, precision).	Ensuring method robustness with these standards is paramount; green modifications must not compromise data quality [28].

Optimizing instrumental parameters is a direct and effective strategy for minimizing energy consumption in analytical laboratories. As demonstrated, strategic reductions in HPLC runtime and flow rate can significantly reduce solvent use and energy load, thereby improving a method's greenness score. The validation of these improvements across multiple tools like AMGS, Analytical Eco-Scale, and AGREE provides a robust, multi-faceted view of sustainability gains. By adopting the experimental protocols and workflows outlined in this guide, researchers and scientists can systematically enhance the environmental profile of their analytical methods without compromising data quality, contributing meaningfully to corporate sustainability goals and the broader principles of Green Analytical Chemistry.

Integrating Green Principles with Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD)

The pharmaceutical industry is undergoing a significant transformation, driven by the simultaneous pursuit of analytical excellence and environmental responsibility. This evolution has catalyzed the strategic integration of Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles with Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD) frameworks, creating a powerful paradigm for developing robust, sustainable analytical methods [64]. While traditional analytical method development has prioritized performance metrics alone, this integrated approach ensures that environmental impact—including toxic solvent consumption, energy usage, and waste generation—becomes a fundamental consideration throughout the development process [17] [65].

The limitations of a singular focus on green principles have prompted the emergence of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC), which expands the evaluation framework to balance environmental sustainability (green) with analytical performance (red) and practical/economic feasibility (blue) [17]. This holistic perspective aligns seamlessly with AQbD's systematic methodology, creating a comprehensive foundation for modern analytical development that satisfies regulatory, performance, and environmental requirements simultaneously. This guide examines the practical implementation of these integrated approaches, providing researchers with actionable protocols, comparison data, and visualization tools to advance sustainable analytical practices in pharmaceutical development.

Theoretical Framework: GAC, AQbD, and the Evolution to WAC

Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) Foundations

Green Analytical Chemistry originated from the broader green chemistry movement, formally established by Paul Anastas and John Warner in the late 1990s [17]. GAC principles specifically adapt these concepts to analytical chemistry, focusing on minimizing the environmental impact of analytical processes through strategies such as solvent replacement, miniaturization, waste reduction, and process automation [64]. The 12 principles of GAC provide a comprehensive framework for implementing sustainable practices, with core objectives including the elimination of hazardous chemicals, minimization of energy consumption, and reduction of waste generation throughout the analytical lifecycle [17].

Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD) Fundamentals

Quality by Design is a systematic approach to development that emphasizes product and process understanding based on sound science and quality risk management [66]. In analytical chemistry, AQbD applies these principles to method development, focusing on defining the Analytical Target Profile (ATP), identifying Critical Method Parameters (CMPs), and establishing a Method Operable Design Region (MODR) [67] [65]. Unlike traditional one-factor-at-a-time (OFAT) approaches, AQbD employs statistical Design of Experiments (DoE) to understand factor interactions and build robustness directly into methods, thereby facilitating method transfer without requiring revalidation [65].

White Analytical Chemistry (WAC): The Integrated Paradigm

White Analytical Chemistry has emerged as an evolutionary advancement that addresses limitations in the GAC model, particularly the potential trade-offs between environmental sustainability and analytical performance [17]. WAC introduces a balanced three-dimensional framework evaluating:

• Red Criteria: Analytical performance (accuracy, precision, sensitivity, selectivity)
• Green Criteria: Environmental impact (energy consumption, waste generation, toxicity)
• Blue Criteria: Practical and economic feasibility (cost, time, availability, scalability) [17]

This RGB model provides a more comprehensive evaluation structure, recognizing that truly sustainable methods must excel across all three dimensions rather than optimizing for environmental considerations alone.

Figure 1: Integrated AQbD-GAC-WAC Framework for Sustainable Method Development. This workflow illustrates the systematic integration of quality, green, and practicality considerations throughout analytical method development.

Experimental Protocols: Implementing Integrated AQbD-GAC Approaches

Protocol 1: AQbD-Based Green UPLC Method for Mycophenolate Mofetil Impurities

This protocol demonstrates the integration of AQbD and GAC principles for developing a UPLC method to quantify impurities in mycophenolate mofetil drug substances and oral suspensions [66].

Methodology and Workflow:

• Analytical Target Profile Definition: The ATP specified separation and quantification of eight known impurities (A-H) with resolution >2.0 between all peak pairs.
• Critical Method Parameter Screening: Initial risk assessment identified four CMPs: pH of mobile phase buffer, initial gradient composition, flow rate, and column temperature.
• Experimental Design: A D-optimal design screened CMPs, followed by optimization using Central Composite Design (CCD) with 30 experimental runs.
• Optimal Conditions: Achieved using Waters Acquity UPLC BEH C18 column (100 × 2.1 mm, 1.7 µm) with 25 mM KH₂PO₄ buffer (pH 4.05) and acetonitrile as mobile phase in gradient elution. Flow rate: 0.4 mL/min, column temperature: 30°C, detection: 215 nm.
• Greenness Assessment: Method evaluated using AGREE, GAPI, and Analytical Eco-Scale tools, confirming superior environmental profile compared to conventional methods [66].

Key Advantages:

• Reduced organic solvent consumption by 73% compared to USP monograph methods
• Shorter analysis time (12 minutes versus 40 minutes in conventional methods)
• Enhanced sensitivity with LOQ values ranging from 0.006% to 0.01% for various impurities

Protocol 2: Green HPLC Method for Thalassemia Drugs in Biological Fluids

This protocol details the development of an HPLC method for simultaneous determination of deferasirox (DFX) and deferiprone (DFP) in rat plasma using integrated AQbD-GAC approach [65].

Methodology and Workflow:

• Quality Risk Assessment: Preliminary risk identification for five chromatographic parameters using Ishikawa diagram.
• Parameter Screening: Plackett-Burman design screened five factors: organic modifier ratio, pH, buffer concentration, flow rate, and column temperature.
• Optimization: Custom experimental design (two levels-three factors) optimized critical parameters using desirability function.
• Optimal Conditions: XBridge HPLC RP-C18 column (4.6 × 250 mm, 5 µm) with ethanol:acidic water (pH 3.0) (70:30, v/v) as mobile phase at 1 mL/min flow rate. UV detection at 225 nm, temperature: 25°C.
• Greenness Assessment: Eight assessment tools (NEMI, modified NEMI, AMVI, Analytical Eco-Scale, AMGS, HPLC-EAT, GAPI, AGREE) confirmed method greenness [65].

Key Advantages:

• Use of greener solvent (ethanol) instead of traditional acetonitrile
• Successful application to pharmacokinetic study in rat plasma
• Linear ranges of 0.30–20.00 µg/mL for DFX and 0.20–20.00 µg/mL for DFP

Protocol 3: Green/Blue UHPLC-MS/MS for Trace Pharmaceutical Monitoring

This protocol presents a green/blue UHPLC-MS/MS method for simultaneous determination of carbamazepine, caffeine, and ibuprofen in water and wastewater [41].

Methodology and Workflow:

• Sample Preparation: Solid-phase extraction without evaporation step to reduce solvent consumption and energy usage.
• Chromatographic Separation: ACQUITY UPLC BEH C18 column (100 × 2.1 mm, 1.7 µm) with gradient elution using water and acetonitrile, both with 0.1% formic acid.
• Mass Spectrometry Detection: Tandem MS with Multiple Reaction Monitoring (MRM) for enhanced selectivity and sensitivity.
• Method Validation: Following ICH guidelines Q2(R2), demonstrating specificity, linearity (r ≥ 0.999), precision (RSD < 5.0%), and accuracy (recovery: 77-160%).
• Green-Blue Assessment: Evaluation of both environmental impact (green) and practical feasibility (blue) attributes [41].

Key Advantages:

• Elimination of energy-intensive evaporation step after SPE
• Short analysis time (10 minutes)
• Exceptional sensitivity with LODs of 100 ng/L for carbamazepine, 300 ng/L for caffeine, and 200 ng/L for ibuprofen

Greenness Assessment Tools: Comparative Evaluation

The evaluation of method greenness requires specialized metrics and tools. This section compares the most widely used greenness assessment tools based on data from comparative studies [68] [69].

Table 1: Comprehensive Comparison of Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Assessment Basis	Output Format	Scoring Range	Key Advantages	Reported Limitations
NEMI (National Environmental Methods Index)	Four criteria: PBT, hazardous, corrosive, waste amount	Pictogram (four quadrants)	Pass/Fail per quadrant	Simple, quick visualization	Limited differentiation; 14/16 methods had same pictogram in study [69]
Analytical Eco-Scale	Penalty points for hazardous reagents, energy, waste	Numerical score	Ideal = 100; <75 = excellent; <50 = acceptable	Provides quantitative comparison	Does not highlight specific weak points for improvement [69]
GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index)	Five steps of analytical process	Pictogram (5 segments, 3 colors each)	Qualitative (green/yellow/red)	Comprehensive, covers entire method lifecycle	Complex assessment protocol; subjective elements [69]
AGREE (Analytical GREEness)	All 12 GAC principles	Pictogram (12 segments) with numerical score	0-1 (1 = ideal greenness)	Comprehensive, automated calculation, highlights weak points	Requires specialized software [69]
BAGI (Blue Applicability Grade Index)	Practical and economic aspects	Numerical score and pictogram	0-100 (higher = better)	Evalu practical feasibility (blue criteria)	Newer tool with limited application history [68]
ChlorTox Scale	Chlorinated solvent toxicity assessment	Numerical score	Lower = better	Specialized for chlorinated solvent impact	Limited to specific toxicity assessment [68]

Table 2: Tool Application in Case Studies (Method Greenness Scores)

Analytical Method	NEMI	Analytical Eco-Scale	GAPI	AGREE	BAGI	ChlorTox Scale
UPLC for Mycophenolate Mofetil [66]	Not reported	>75 (Excellent)	Mostly green segments	>0.8 (Excellent)	Not reported	Not reported
HPLC for Thalassemia Drugs [65]	4/4 quadrants	>75 (Excellent)	Not reported	>0.8 (Excellent)	Not reported	Not reported
UHPLC-MS/MS for Pharmaceuticals [41]	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported	Not reported
Cilnidipine Methods (Study Average) [68]	Variable	68-82	7-10 green segments	0.62-0.81	72-88	2.1-4.3

The comparative study of four greenness assessment tools for hyoscine N-butyl bromide methods demonstrated that applying multiple tools provides the most comprehensive evaluation, as each tool has unique strengths and may yield different conclusions about method greenness [69].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Solutions

Successful implementation of integrated AQbD-GAC approaches requires specific reagents, instruments, and software solutions. This toolkit compiles essential resources from the experimental protocols discussed in this guide.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Solutions for AQbD-GAC Implementation

Category	Specific Products/Technologies	Function/Role in AQbD-GAC	Greenness Considerations
Chromatography Columns	Waters Acquity UPLC BEH C18 (100 × 2.1 mm, 1.7 µm) [66]; XBridge HPLC RP-C18 (4.6 × 250 mm, 5 µm) [65]	Stationary phase for separation	UPLC columns enable higher efficiency with smaller particle size, reducing solvent consumption
Green Solvents	Ethanol [65]; Acetonitrile (reduced consumption) [66]; Water (as mobile phase component)	Mobile phase components	Ethanol is less toxic alternative to acetonitrile; solvent reduction strategies minimize environmental impact
Instrumentation Platforms	Waters H-Class UPLC [66]; Dionex Ultimate 3000 UHPLC [65]; Waters Xevo G2-XS Q-ToF MS [66]	Analytical measurement systems	Modern instruments designed for lower solvent consumption and higher energy efficiency
Software Solutions	Design-Expert [67] [66]; Empower Chromatography Data System [66]; UNIFI for MS data [66]	DoE, data acquisition, and processing	Enables AQbD implementation through statistical optimization and method robustness evaluation
Sample Preparation Materials	Solid-phase extraction cartridges [41]; 0.2 µm PVDF syringe filters [66]	Sample cleanup and preparation	SPE without evaporation reduces solvent use; proper sorbent selection minimizes material consumption
Greenness Assessment Tools	AGREE, GAPI, Analytical Eco-Scale software [68] [69] [66]	Method environmental impact evaluation	Digital tools automate greenness scoring and facilitate comparative assessments

WAC Evaluation Framework: Integrating RGB Criteria

The White Analytical Chemistry framework provides a balanced approach for comprehensive method evaluation. The following diagram illustrates the WAC assessment process integrating red (analytical), green (environmental), and blue (practical) criteria.

Figure 2: White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) Evaluation Framework. This process illustrates the comprehensive assessment of analytical methods across three critical dimensions: analytical performance (Red), environmental impact (Green), and practical feasibility (Blue).

Comparative Data Analysis: Greenness Tool Performance

Based on comparative studies of greenness assessment tools, the following patterns emerge regarding their application and effectiveness:

Tool Selection Recommendations:

• For quick preliminary assessment: NEMI provides simple pictogram evaluation
• For comprehensive environmental profiling: AGREE and GAPI offer detailed lifecycle assessment
• For practical feasibility focus: BAGI evaluates the blue criteria of WAC framework
• For holistic method evaluation: Multiple tools should be applied concurrently [69]

Industry Implementation Trends: Recent studies demonstrate increasing adoption of AGREE and GAPI for pharmaceutical method evaluation, with these tools providing more nuanced assessment compared to earlier metrics like NEMI [68] [69]. The analytical eco-scale remains valuable for its straightforward numerical scoring system, particularly for methods claiming "green" status [69].

The comparative analysis of cilnidipine methods confirmed that modern greenness assessment tools effectively differentiate between methods with similar analytical performance but varying environmental impacts, enabling evidence-based selection of truly sustainable approaches [68].

The integration of Green Principles with Analytical Quality by Design represents a transformative advancement in pharmaceutical analytical development. The case studies and data presented in this guide demonstrate that the combined AQbD-GAC approach consistently yields methods with superior environmental profiles while maintaining—and often enhancing—analytical performance compared to conventional development approaches [67] [65] [66].

The evolution toward White Analytical Chemistry frameworks provides a more balanced evaluation paradigm, addressing the legitimate concern that exclusive focus on environmental metrics might compromise analytical performance or practical implementation [17]. The RGB model acknowledges that sustainable method development must address all three dimensions to achieve meaningful adoption and impact.

Future developments in this field will likely include increased automation of greenness assessments, deeper integration of WAC principles into regulatory submissions, and the emergence of "green financing" models specifically supporting sustainable analytical chemistry innovation [17]. As these trends mature, the pharmaceutical industry moves closer to a future where analytical excellence and environmental responsibility become inseparable components of quality method development.

Benchmarking and Cross-Validation for Credible Sustainability Claims

Cross-validation serves as a cornerstone of robust model evaluation, providing a framework to estimate how results will generalize to an independent dataset. In the context of validating greenness scores across multiple analytical tools, cross-validation helps flag critical problems like overfitting and selection bias, offering crucial insights into model stability and parameter quality [70]. This approach is particularly valuable when comparing the performance of diverse sustainability assessment tools, as it uses resampling and sample splitting methods that evaluate different portions of data across iterations to deliver a more accurate estimate of predictive performance [70].

The fundamental principle behind cross-validation involves partitioning available data into complementary subsets: one for training (building the model) and another for validation (testing model performance) [70]. This process is repeated multiple times with different partitions, and results are combined (typically averaged) across rounds to produce a single, more reliable estimate of the model's predictive capability [70]. For researchers and drug development professionals comparing greenness scores, this methodology provides a structured approach to determine which assessment tool offers the most reliable and generalizable results for specific analytical applications.

Core Cross-Validation Methodologies

Fundamental Techniques

Several cross-validation techniques have been developed, each with distinct advantages for specific data scenarios and research questions. Understanding these core methodologies is essential for selecting an appropriate framework when comparing greenness scoring tools.

The hold-out method represents the simplest cross-validation technique, involving a single random partition of data into training and test sets, typically using an 80/20 split [71]. While computationally efficient for large datasets, this approach suffers from high variance in performance estimation due to its dependence on a single random split, potentially leading to unreliable comparisons between greenness tools [71].

K-fold cross-validation addresses this limitation by dividing the dataset into k equal-sized folds (commonly k=5 or 10) [70]. Each fold serves as the validation set once, while the remaining k-1 folds form the training set [72]. The final performance metric is averaged across all k iterations, providing a more stable and trustworthy estimate than single hold-out validation [71]. This method is particularly effective for model selection and parameter tuning in greenness score validation.

Leave-one-out cross-validation (LOOCV) represents an extreme case of k-fold cross-validation where k equals the number of samples in the dataset [70]. While this approach utilizes maximum data for training in each iteration and is nearly unbiased, it comes with significant computational expense, making it impractical for large datasets [70] [71].

Table 1: Comparison of Fundamental Cross-Validation Techniques

Technique	Key Features	Advantages	Disadvantages	Best Use Cases
Hold-Out	Single train-test split (typically 80/20)	Simple, fast computation	High variance, dependent on single split	Very large datasets, initial prototyping
K-Fold	Data divided into k folds; each fold used once for validation	More reliable than hold-out, lower variance	Requires k model trainings, computational cost	General model comparison, parameter tuning
Leave-One-Out (LOOCV)	Special case of k-fold where k = number of samples	Minimal bias, uses most data for training	Computationally expensive, high variance for large datasets	Very small datasets where data is precious

Specialized Cross-Validation Strategies

Beyond fundamental techniques, specialized cross-validation strategies address specific data challenges commonly encountered when comparing sustainability metrics.

Stratified k-fold cross-validation preserves the percentage of samples for each target class in every fold, making it particularly valuable for datasets with imbalanced labels [73] [71]. For example, when validating greenness scores across methods with different score distributions, stratified approaches ensure representative sampling of all score ranges in each iteration.

Time-series cross-validation respects temporal ordering by using rolling or expanding windows, where each validation set contains only observations from time periods after the training period [73]. This approach prevents data leakage from future to past, which is crucial when analyzing the evolution of greenness metrics over time.

Grouped cross-validation ensures that all samples from the same group (e.g., same pharmaceutical compound, same analytical laboratory) appear exclusively in either training or validation sets [73]. This prevents hidden leakage that can occur when correlated samples appear in both training and testing phases, which is particularly relevant when comparing greenness scores across multiple measurements of the same compounds [73].

Designing a Cross-Validation Framework for Greenness Score Validation

Experimental Design Considerations

Validating greenness scores across multiple assessment tools requires careful experimental design to ensure meaningful, reproducible comparisons. The selection of an appropriate cross-validation strategy should be guided by three key questions about the data [73]:

First, researchers must determine whether there is a natural time order in the data collection process. If greenness scores are collected sequentially or method performance may change over time, time-series cross-validation should be employed to prevent temporal leakage [73].

Second, analysts should assess whether labels are imbalanced across the dataset. For instance, if most analytical methods cluster within a narrow greenness score range while few methods represent extreme values, stratified k-fold approaches will ensure proper representation of all score ranges in each fold [73].

Third, researchers must identify whether observations are grouped by common factors such as pharmaceutical compound class, analytical technique, or research laboratory. When such groupings exist, group k-fold validation should be implemented to prevent artificially inflated performance metrics [73].

Implementation Workflow

A robust cross-validation framework for comparing greenness scoring tools follows a structured workflow that maintains data integrity throughout the validation process. The diagram below illustrates this comprehensive approach:

Cross-Validation Workflow for Greenness Score Comparison

This workflow emphasizes several critical implementation details. First, data preprocessing (including standardization, feature selection, and transformation) must be learned exclusively from the training set and applied to validation data to prevent data leakage [72]. scikit-learn's Pipeline functionality provides robust mechanisms to enforce this separation [72].

Second, the same cross-validation folds must be applied across all greenness scoring tools being compared to ensure fair, consistent evaluation [73]. This requires setting random seeds and maintaining deterministic splitting procedures throughout the experimentation process.

Third, performance metrics should be aligned with specific validation objectives. For classification tasks comparing greenness categories, precision, recall, and AUC are appropriate for imbalanced tasks, while MAE and RMSE with fold-level spreads suit regression and forecasting applications [73].

Statistical Comparison of Multiple Models

After cross-validation produces performance metrics for each greenness scoring tool across all folds, researchers must determine whether observed differences are statistically significant rather than attributable to random variation.

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) tests whether performance varies across models more than within them, indicating whether overall differences exist among the compared tools [73]. If ANOVA reveals significant differences, post-hoc tests identify specific pairings where tools perform differently:

• Tukey's HSD is ideal for all-pairs comparisons between multiple greenness tools [73]
• Dunnett's test is appropriate when comparing several tools against a control or benchmark method [73]
• Bonferroni correction suits situations involving a limited number of pre-planned comparisons [73]

Beyond statistical significance, researchers should report effect sizes and confidence intervals to communicate the practical impact of performance differences between tools [73]. For example, when comparing greenness scores, the magnitude of difference in prediction accuracy may be more informative than mere statistical significance alone.

Case Study: Validating Chromatographic Greenness Scores

Experimental Protocol

To illustrate the practical application of cross-validation in comparing greenness scoring tools, we examine a published study evaluating chromatographic methods for pharmaceutical analysis [39]. This research compared Normal-Phase HPTLC (NP-HPTLC) and Reversed-Phase HPTLC (RP-HPTLC) methods for determining ertugliflozin (ERZ) using multiple greenness assessment tools.

The experimental design incorporated method validation according to ICH Q2-R2 guidelines alongside greenness evaluation using four distinct tools: National Environmental Method Index (NEMI), Analytical Eco-Scale (AES), ChlorTox, and Analytical GREEnness (AGREE) [39]. This multifaceted approach enabled comprehensive sustainability assessment across different environmental dimensions.

Table 2: Greenness Assessment Tools for Chromatographic Method Comparison

Tool Name	Assessment Approach	Scoring System	Key Metrics
NEMI	Qualitative evaluation	Pass/Fail criteria for 4 categories	Persistence, bioaccumulation, toxicity, waste generation
Analytical Eco-Scale	Semi-quantitative penalty system	Base score (100) minus penalty points	Reagent toxicity, energy consumption, waste generation
ChlorTox	Chlorinated solvent focus	Toxicity and environmental impact score	Chlorinated solvent usage, safety/toxicity concerns
AGREE	Comprehensive multi-criteria	0-1 scale with pictorial output	12 principles of green analytical chemistry

The cross-validation framework was implemented by comparing the performance of both chromatographic methods across multiple validation parameters, with each method serving as a test case for greenness tool comparison. The k-fold cross-validation approach (with k=5) ensured robust performance estimation, with metrics collected across all folds and averaged for final comparison.

Comparative Results and Interpretation

The experimental results demonstrated clear differences between the chromatographic methods, with RP-HPTLC exhibiting superior performance across both analytical and environmental metrics [39]. The greenness assessment consistently identified RP-HPTLC as the more sustainable approach, with the AGREE tool providing particularly comprehensive evaluation through its multi-criteria assessment [39].

For the NP-HPTLC method, the traditional mobile phase chloroform/methanol (85:15 v/v) produced well-eluted chromatographic signals but raised environmental concerns due to chlorinated solvent use [39]. In contrast, the RP-HPTLC method utilizing ethanol-water (80:20 v/v) mobile phase demonstrated better environmental profile while maintaining analytical validity [39].

The cross-validation approach strengthened these conclusions by demonstrating consistent performance across multiple validation folds and metrics. By employing structured comparison methodology, the researchers could confidently recommend the RP-HPTLC approach for determining ERZ in pharmaceutical products based on its superior combination of analytical performance and greenness characteristics [39].

Research Reagent Solutions for Greenness Validation Studies

Implementing robust cross-validation frameworks for greenness score comparison requires specific methodological components and analytical tools. The following table outlines essential "research reagents" for designing such studies:

Table 3: Essential Methodological Components for Greenness Validation Studies

Component	Function	Implementation Examples
Data Splitting Algorithms	Partition datasets into training/validation sets	scikit-learn's KFold, StratifiedKFold, GroupKFold [72]
Performance Metrics	Quantify model performance and generalization	Accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score for classification; MAE, RMSE for regression [73]
Statistical Testing Frameworks	Determine significance of performance differences	ANOVA, Tukey's HSD, Dunnett's test [73]
Greenness Assessment Tools	Evaluate environmental impact of analytical methods	NEMI, Analytical Eco-Scale, AGREE, AMGS [39] [28]
Pipeline Management	Prevent data leakage during preprocessing	scikit-learn's Pipeline with built-in cross-validation [72]
Visualization Tools	Communicate comparative results effectively	AGREE pictograms, radial plots, performance comparison charts [39]

Cross-validation provides an essential methodological framework for rigorously comparing greenness scoring tools in pharmaceutical and analytical research. By implementing appropriate validation strategies that account for data structure, time ordering, and grouping effects, researchers can obtain reliable performance estimates that generalize to new methodological applications.

The structured approach outlined in this guide—incorporating appropriate cross-validation techniques, statistical comparison methods, and comprehensive greenness assessment tools—enables meaningful comparison of sustainability metrics across different analytical contexts. As the field of green analytical chemistry continues to evolve, such robust validation frameworks will be increasingly crucial for distinguishing substantiated environmental claims from unverified assertions.

For researchers and drug development professionals, adopting these cross-validation practices will support more informed decisions regarding sustainable method selection, ultimately contributing to the pharmaceutical industry's broader environmental objectives while maintaining the rigorous analytical standards required for patient safety and regulatory compliance.

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Scores for Olmesartan Across Techniques

The pharmaceutical industry is increasingly adopting green chemistry principles to minimize the environmental impact of drug development and quality control. This shift is particularly relevant in analytical chemistry, where the cumulative ecological footprint of numerous routine analyses can be substantial [28]. The evaluation of analytical method greenness has evolved significantly, transitioning from a focus solely on analytical performance to a holistic approach that balances environmental impact, practicality, and analytical efficacy—a concept known as White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) [20]. Within this framework, multiple greenness assessment tools have been developed to quantify the environmental sustainability of analytical methods.

This guide provides a comparative analysis of greenness scores for various analytical techniques used in the quantification of olmesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker commonly prescribed for hypertension. By synthesizing data from multiple studies and applying different greenness metrics, we aim to offer researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals an objective evaluation of method sustainability to inform greener analytical choices in pharmaceutical analysis.

Greenness Assessment Tools and Metrics

Several metric tools have been developed to evaluate the environmental impact of analytical methods. The most prominent include:

• Analytical Eco-Scale (AES): A semi-quantitative tool that assigns penalty points for parameters such as reagent toxicity, energy consumption, and waste generation. A higher score (closer to 100) indicates a greener method [28].

• AGREE (Analytical GREEnness metric): This comprehensive tool evaluates methods against all 12 principles of green analytical chemistry, providing a score between 0 and 1, with higher scores indicating better environmental performance [74] [28].

• BAGI (Blue Applicability Grade Index): Focuses on the practical aspects and applicability of analytical methods, complementing greenness assessments with practicality evaluation [74] [21].

• GAPI (Green Analytical Procedure Index): Uses a colored pictogram to represent environmental impact across five stages of the analytical procedure, with green indicating low impact, yellow moderate, and red high impact [28].

• AMGS (Analytical Method Greenness Score): Specifically designed for chromatographic methods, evaluating solvent energy consumption, environmental health and safety (EHS) factors, and instrument energy usage [28].

The RGB Model and White Analytical Chemistry

The concept of White Analytical Chemistry (WAC) integrates three key dimensions of method evaluation through the RGB model: Red for analytical performance, Green for environmental impact, and Blue for practicality [20]. This holistic approach ensures that methods are not only environmentally friendly but also analytically sound and practically viable. The model has spurred the development of specialized metrics for each dimension, including the Red Analytical Performance Index (RAPI) for red attributes and BAGI for blue attributes, alongside the various green metrics [20] [21].

Comparative Greenness Scores for Olmesartan Analytical Techniques

Greenness Assessment of Techniques for Olmesartan Analysis

A comprehensive assessment of six analytical techniques for olmesartan quantification reveals significant variation in greenness scores across different metrics. The table below summarizes the published data for direct comparison [74]:

Table 1: Greenness scores for olmesartan analytical techniques across different metrics

Analytical Technique	Analytical Eco-Scale (AES)	AGREE Score	BAGI Score
UV Spectrophotometry	79-86	0.6-0.71	77.5-82.5
HPLC	66-68	0.55-0.65	72.5-82.5
HPTLC	77	0.58-0.65	75-77.5
UPLC	75-89	0.62	80
LC-MS	67-75	0.65-0.66	75-80
UPLC-MS	67-75	0.68-0.69	80

Interpretation of Comparative Data

The data reveals that UV spectrophotometry consistently achieves high greenness scores across all three metrics, with the highest AES scores (79-86) and competitive AGREE (0.6-0.71) and BAGI (77.5-82.5) values [74]. This positions UV spectrophotometry as one of the greenest options for olmesartan analysis, particularly in terms of solvent consumption and energy usage.

UPLC and UPLC-MS techniques demonstrate notable performance, with UPLC achieving the highest maximum AES score (89) and UPLC-MS showing the highest AGREE scores (0.68-0.69) among chromatographic methods [74]. This suggests that ultra-performance liquid chromatography technologies offer improved sustainability profiles compared to conventional HPLC, likely due to reduced solvent consumption and analysis time.

HPLC and LC-MS generally show lower greenness scores across metrics, particularly for AES (66-75 range) [74]. This reflects the higher solvent consumption and energy requirements associated with these techniques, though they remain valuable for their analytical capabilities.

Green Spectrofluorimetric Analysis of Olmesartan in Biological Matrices

A novel spectrofluorimetric method developed for the simultaneous quantification of aspirin, olmesartan, and metoprolol in spiked human plasma has demonstrated excellent greenness credentials. When assessed using GAPI and AGREE metrics, this method achieved high greenness scores, positioning it as an environmentally favorable approach for analyzing these commonly co-administered cardiovascular drugs [75].

The method employed several green chemistry strategies, including:

• Minimal solvent consumption through microscale analysis
• Use of ethanol-water mixtures as environmentally preferable solvents
• Reduced sample preparation steps minimizing reagent use
• Energy-efficient instrumentation [75]

This approach aligns with the principles of green analytical chemistry while maintaining the sensitivity and selectivity required for bioanalytical applications, particularly valuable for therapeutic drug monitoring of olmesartan in clinical settings.

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

Green Spectrofluorimetric Method for Olmesartan Analysis

The spectrofluorimetric method for simultaneous determination of aspirin, olmesartan, and metoprolol in spiked human plasma was developed using a Jasco FP-6200 spectrofluorometer [75]. The method addresses the challenge of overlapping fluorescence spectra through a multi-technique approach:

• Native fluorescence measurement: Metoprolol was directly determined at 302 nm following excitation at 230 nm without interference from aspirin or olmesartan
• Synchronous fluorescence spectrometry: Using Δλ = 110 nm enabled determination of olmesartan at 364 nm without interference
• Second-order derivative transformation: Applied to synchronous spectra to determine aspirin at 426 nm without interference [75]

Sample Preparation Protocol

• Plasma processing: 0.1 mL of human plasma was mixed with 5 mL of acetonitrile in centrifuge tubes
• Drug spiking: Tubes were spiked with 1 mL of working standard solutions of the studied drugs
• Extraction: Samples were vortexed for 10 minutes followed by centrifugation at 5000 rpm for 20 minutes
• Reconstitution: Dried supernatants were reconstituted with ethanol and 1 mL of acetate buffer solution (pH 5)
• Volume adjustment: Final volume was adjusted with water to prepare calibration samples [75]

Validation Parameters

The method was validated according to ICH M10 guidelines for bioanalytical methods, demonstrating:

• Linear ranges of 20-1000 ng/mL for aspirin, 50-800 ng/mL for olmesartan, and 100-1400 ng/mL for metoprolol
• Selectivity against endogenous plasma interferents
• Precision with %CV within acceptable limits
• Accuracy with mean percent recovery meeting validation criteria
• Satisfactory extraction recovery and stability under various conditions [75]

HPLC Method for Olmesartan Medoxomil Hydrolysis Study

A novel HPLC method was developed to simultaneously quantify olmesartan medoxomil (OLM) and its hydrolysis product olmesartan (OL) to investigate OLM's stability in different pH conditions. This study addressed the critical pharmaceutical issue of OLM's low bioavailability, which is influenced by its pH-dependent solubility and hydrolysis in aqueous media [76].

Experimental Workflow

The experimental approach included:

• Method development: Optimization of chromatographic conditions for simultaneous separation of OLM and OL
• Solubility studies: Evaluation of OLM solubility across physiological pH range (1.2-6.0) at 37°C
• Hydrolysis kinetics: Monitoring OLM degradation and OL formation over time in different pH buffers
• Kinetic modeling: Application of zero-order kinetics to quantify hydrolysis rates [76]

Key Findings

The study revealed that:

• OLM solubility was pH-dependent, potentially leading to food effects and intestinal precipitation
• Aqueous hydrolysis of OLM was rapid and significant across all pH levels
• Hydrolysis rates followed the order: pH 1.2 < pH 3.5 < pH 4.6 ≈ pH 6.0
• Both low solubility and hydrolysis contribute to OLM's low bioavailability (26%) [76]

These findings highlight the importance of understanding prodrug hydrolysis in formulation development and the need for analytical methods capable of tracking both parent compound and degradation products.

Visualizing Analytical Workflows and Relationships

Greenness Assessment Logic and Workflow

The following diagram illustrates the decision-making process and relationships between different greenness assessment tools in the context of White Analytical Chemistry:

Diagram 1: Greenness assessment workflow for analytical methods showing the relationship between White Analytical Chemistry principles and specific evaluation tools.

Spectrofluorimetric Method Workflow

The following diagram outlines the key steps in the green spectrofluorimetric analysis of olmesartan in biological matrices:

Diagram 2: Experimental workflow for green spectrofluorimetric analysis of olmesartan with aspirin and metoprolol in plasma.

Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 2: Key research reagents and solutions for olmesartan analysis

Reagent/Material	Function/Purpose	Greenness Considerations
Olmesartan Reference Standard	Method development and calibration	Primary standard, minimal usage recommended
Acetonitrile (HPLC grade)	Protein precipitation in sample preparation	High environmental impact; reuse or miniaturization advised
Ethanol	Solvent for standard solutions and reconstitution	Preferable to acetonitrile due to better environmental profile
Acetate Buffer (pH 5)	pH control in spectrofluorimetric analysis	Low toxicity components
Human Plasma	Biological matrix for method validation	Ethical sourcing; minimal consumption through microscale methods
Water (HPLC grade)	Diluent and mobile phase component	Minimize consumption through method optimization

This comparative analysis demonstrates significant variation in the greenness profiles of different analytical techniques used for olmesartan quantification. UV spectrophotometry emerges as the greenest option based on multiple metrics, while advanced techniques like UPLC and UPLC-MS offer improved sustainability profiles compared to conventional HPLC. The development of green spectrofluorimetric methods for biological sample analysis highlights the potential for maintaining analytical performance while reducing environmental impact.

The choice of assessment tool significantly influences greenness evaluation, with each metric emphasizing different aspects of environmental impact. This underscores the importance of the White Analytical Chemistry approach, which balances greenness with analytical performance and practical applicability. As pharmaceutical analysis continues to evolve, the integration of greenness assessment during method development will be crucial for advancing sustainability goals without compromising analytical quality.

Future developments in greenness metrics should address current limitations, including standardization of weighting factors, consideration of uncertainty in assessments, and improved integration of multiple evaluation dimensions to provide more comprehensive sustainability profiles for analytical methods.

In modern pharmaceutical development, the environmental impact of analytical methods is no longer an afterthought. Green Analytical Chemistry (GAC) principles have emerged as essential components of sustainable drug development, driving the need for standardized metrics to quantify and improve environmental performance. The Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS) has emerged as a pivotal tool specifically designed for this purpose, enabling scientists to benchmark and improve the environmental footprint of chromatographic methods throughout the drug development lifecycle.

Leading pharmaceutical companies like AstraZeneca have recognized that while individual analytical methods may seem insignificant, their cumulative impact is substantial. A compelling case study of rosuvastatin calcium illustrates this scale: with approximately 25 liquid chromatography analyses per batch and an estimated 1,000 batches produced globally annually, this single active pharmaceutical ingredient consumes approximately 18,000 liters of mobile phase each year just for quality control testing [28]. This startling figure underscores why AstraZeneca has committed to achieving carbon zero status for analytical laboratories by 2030, with AMGS implementation serving as a cornerstone strategy [28].

The Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS): Framework and Components

AMGS Foundations and Development

The AMGS represents a specialized metric developed through collaboration between the American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute (ACS GCI) Pharmaceutical Roundtable and industry partners [35] [28]. Unlike broader green assessment tools, AMGS was specifically designed for chromatographic methods, incorporating critical dimensions often overlooked in generic frameworks: solvent health/safety/environmental impact, cumulative energy demand, instrument energy consumption, and method solvent waste [35].

The tool's development originated from a Microsoft Excel-based program created at Bristol-Myers Squibb, with subsequent refinements by scientists from multiple pharmaceutical companies including AstraZeneca, Merck, and Pfizer [35]. This industry-driven development ensures practical relevance for pharmaceutical analytical laboratories. The AMGS calculation generates a numerical score where lower values indicate greener methods, with color-coded components (yellow and red) highlighting specific areas requiring improvement [35].

Core Assessment Components

The AMGS framework evaluates three primary components that collectively determine a method's environmental impact:

• Solvent EHS (Environment, Health, and Safety): Assesses solvent toxicity, flammability, reactivity, and environmental impact based on NFPA ratings and other hazard criteria [35] [28].
• Solvent Energy: Calculates cumulative energy demand for solvent production and disposal, accounting for the embedded energy in mobile phase components [28].
• Instrument Energy: Quantifies electricity consumption during method operation, influenced by runtime, flow rates, and instrument type [28].

This multi-faceted approach provides a holistic assessment that captures both direct operational impacts and indirect supply chain contributions to a method's environmental footprint.

Experimental Protocols for AMGS Implementation

Data Collection Requirements

Implementing AMGS requires meticulous collection of chromatographic method parameters:

• Mobile Phase Composition: Exact proportions of all solvents in the mobile phase
• Method Duration: Total runtime including equilibration times
• Flow Rate: Precisely measured in mL/min
• Injection Volume: Measured in μL
• Sample Preparation Details: Solvents, reagents, and energy-intensive steps
• System Suitability Test (SST) Parameters: Including serial dilution volumes [35]

For the SST, if preparations involve serial dilution, the total volume of all dilution steps must be included in the calculation, as this contributes significantly to solvent consumption [35].

Calculation Methodology

The AMGS calculator employs a weighted algorithm that integrates the three core components:

Where each component is calculated based on the collected method parameters and reference data for solvent impacts. The current version specifically supports liquid chromatography and SFC methods, with gas chromatography support planned for early 2026 [35].

Workflow for Method Assessment and Improvement

The following diagram illustrates the systematic approach for implementing AMGS in analytical method development:

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool Comparison Framework

While AMGS provides specialized assessment for chromatographic methods, researchers should understand how it compares to other available greenness metrics. The table below summarizes key green assessment tools used in analytical chemistry:

Table 1: Comparison of Greenness Assessment Tools for Analytical Methods

Tool Name	Scope	Scoring System	Output Format	Pharmaceutical Relevance
AMGS	Chromatographic methods	Numerical (lower = greener) + color coding	Numerical score with component breakdown	High (designed specifically for pharma)
Analytical Eco-Scale	General analytical methods	Penalty points subtracted from 100	Single numerical score	Moderate
GAPI	Entire analytical procedure	Qualitative color coding	Five pentagram pictogram	Moderate
AGREE	General analytical methods	0-1 scale for 12 principles	Circular pictogram with overall score	Moderate
GET	Natural product extraction	0-2 points per criterion	"Tree" pictogram with colored leaves	Low (specialized for natural products)
SUSTAIN	Broad processes/initiatives	-2 to +2 per SDG	Percentage score and radial chart	Low (strategic level assessment)

Strategic Insights from Tool Comparison

Each assessment tool offers distinct advantages for different applications:

• AMGS excels in pharmaceutical chromatographic method development due to its specific design for this context and ability to pinpoint improvement areas through component-specific scoring [28].
• AGREE and GAPI provide more visual, at-a-glance assessments suitable for publications and high-level comparisons across different analytical techniques [52].
• Analytical Eco-Scale offers simplicity and quick assessment but lacks the granularity needed for method optimization [28].
• GET specializes in natural product extraction, addressing unique considerations like renewable raw materials and industrial scalability in botanical extraction [77].
• SUSTAIN operates at a strategic level, evaluating alignment with United Nations Sustainable Development Goals rather than technical method details [53].

AstraZeneca's experience demonstrates that AMGS provides the optimal balance of specificity, actionable data, and practical relevance for pharmaceutical chromatographic methods, making it the preferred tool for driving continuous improvement in laboratory sustainability [28].

AstraZeneca's AMGS Implementation: Case Studies and Data

Portfolio Assessment Methodology

AstraZeneca implemented a systematic approach to AMGS adoption, integrating the tool across multiple organizational levels:

• Departmental Assessment: Evaluating the greenness profile of all chromatographic methods across development portfolios
• Drug Project Analysis: Comparing methods within specific drug development programs to identify improvement opportunities
• Individual Method Optimization: Using AMGS component scores to guide method refinement for specific analytical procedures [28]

This multi-level implementation enabled both strategic trending of sustainability metrics and tactical method-specific improvements.

Quantitative Results and Impact

AstraZeneca's comprehensive AMGS implementation yielded significant insights and improvements:

Table 2: AMGS Component Analysis from AstraZeneca's Implementation

AMGS Component	Contribution to Total Score	Primary Drivers	Optimization Strategies
Solvent EHS	40-60%	High-toxicity solvents (acetonitrile), hazardous additives	Substitute with greener alternatives (ethanol, methanol)
Solvent Energy	20-35%	Solvent volume, production energy intensity	Reduce flow rates, minimize method runtime
Instrument Energy	15-30%	Method duration, detection techniques	Shorten run times, implement gradient methods

Through targeted optimization based on AMGS insights, AstraZeneca achieved significant reductions in solvent consumption and energy use across their analytical methods, contributing directly to their corporate sustainability targets [28]. The implementation also fostered greater environmental awareness among analytical scientists, making greenness considerations a fundamental aspect of method development rather than an afterthought.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagent Solutions

Successful AMGS implementation requires both computational tools and practical laboratory solutions. The following table details key resources for developing greener analytical methods:

Table 3: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Green Analytical Chemistry

Resource Category	Specific Examples	Function in Green Method Development
Green Solvent Databases	CHEM21 Solvent Selection Guide, ACS GCI Pharmaceutical Roundtable Solvent Guides	Identify safer solvent alternatives with improved EHS profiles
Method Scaling Tools	UPLC-to-HPLC conversion calculators, column dimension comparators	Enable transfer to smaller-scale methods reducing solvent consumption
AMGS Calculator	ACS GCI online AMGS tool, spreadsheet-based calculators	Quantitatively assess method greenness and identify improvement areas
Alternative Stationary Phases	Fused-core particles, monolithic columns, superficially porous particles	Enable faster separations with lower backpressure, reducing runtime and solvent use
Sample Preparation Tools	Micro-extraction techniques, online sample preparation	Minimize solvent consumption in sample preparation stages

The implementation of AMGS at AstraZeneca demonstrates how targeted greenness assessment tools can drive substantial improvements in pharmaceutical analytical sustainability. By providing specific, actionable data on environmental impact components, AMGS enables scientists to make informed decisions that balance analytical quality with environmental responsibility. As the pharmaceutical industry increasingly prioritizes sustainability, the adoption of standardized metrics like AMGS will be essential for benchmarking performance, guiding method development, and achieving corporate sustainability targets. The continued evolution of these tools, including planned expansions to additional chromatographic techniques, will further enhance their utility in creating a more sustainable future for pharmaceutical analysis.

In the modern pharmaceutical industry, the drive for innovation must be balanced with environmental responsibility. The concept of green chemistry (GC), formalized in 1991, provides a framework for this balance, with principles recently summarized by the acronym "PRODUCTIVELY" [78]. However, technological advancements, such as Three-dimensional printing (3DP) for pharmaceuticals, while promising for personalized medicine, create new challenges for evaluating environmental impact. Traditional manufacturing methods are increasingly scrutinized for their ecological footprint, necessitating robust tools to assess the greenness of novel technologies [78].

This guide compares the leading tools for assessing environmental impact, framing them within a broader thesis on validation. It objectively contrasts quantitative tools, which provide numerical scores for objective comparison, against pictorial tools, which offer visual, at-a-glance understanding. For researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals, selecting the appropriate tool is critical for validating processes, guiding sustainable development, and communicating environmental performance to stakeholders [78].

Tool Comparison: Quantitative and Pictorial Assessment Methods

The evolution of greenness assessment has moved from descriptive evaluations to more sophisticated tools that combine visual and quantitative elements. Early tools like the National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) were largely descriptive, making objective comparisons challenging. Subsequent quantitative tools, such as the Eco-scale Assessment, introduced numerical scoring. The most modern and comprehensive tools, including the Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) and the Analytical GREEnness Metric Approach and Software (AGREE), merge the benefits of quantitative scoring with clear visual illustration to provide a complete evaluation [78].

For the pharmaceutical sector, a novel quantitative tool, the index of Greenness Assessment of Printed Pharmaceuticals (iGAPP), has been proposed specifically for the eco-evaluation of different 3DP technologies. It provides a colour-coded pictogram and a numerical score, addressing a critical gap in the environmental assessment of this emerging manufacturing method [78].

Comparative Analysis of Greenness Assessment Tools

The table below summarizes key tools, their methodologies, and primary outputs to facilitate comparison.

Table 1: Comparison of Greenness Assessment Tools for Pharmaceutical Processes

Tool Name	Type	Primary Output	Key Methodology / Focus	Best Use-Case
iGAPP [78]	Quantitative	Numerical score & color-coded pictogram	Evaluates factors like energy/solvent consumption and waste generation for 3DP technologies.	Comparing the greenness of different 3D printing methods for drug production.
AGREE [78]	Hybrid (Quantitative & Pictorial)	Numerical score & circular pictogram	An inclusive tool that provides a numerical score based on multiple criteria alongside a visual representation.	Comprehensive greenness evaluation of analytical methods.
GAPI [78]	Hybrid (Quantitative & Pictorial)	Numerical score & multi-stage pictogram	Merges quantitative scoring with a visual illustration that covers multiple steps of a procedure.	Assessing the greenness of multi-step analytical procedures.
Eco-scale Assessment [78]	Quantitative	Numerical score	Penalty points are assigned for each element of an analytical process that violates green chemistry principles.	Quick, numerical benchmarking of analytical method greenness.
NEMI [78]	Pictorial	A pictogram with four quadrants	A qualitative tool where a checkmark in a quadrant indicates whether a criterion is met.	Basic, pass/fail screening of a method's environmental impact.

Experimental Protocols for Tool Validation and Application

Validating any greenness assessment tool requires a structured approach to ensure its results are reliable, meaningful, and applicable across different technologies. The following protocol outlines a general methodology for validating tools like iGAPP, which can be adapted for other assessment systems.

General Validation Protocol for Greenness Assessment Tools

Objective: To validate a greenness assessment tool by constructing and comparing the greenness profiles of multiple pharmaceutical formulations produced using different manufacturing technologies.

Materials and Reagents:

• Research Reagent Solutions: A standardized set of solvents, polymers, and active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) used across all manufactured samples.
• Manufacturing Technologies: A selection of technologies to be assessed (e.g., for 3DP: Binder Jetting (BJ), Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM), Stereolithography (SLA)).
• Data Collection Equipment: Instruments to measure energy consumption, solvent use, and waste mass.

Methodology:

• Sample Preparation: Produce identical or functionally equivalent drug dosage forms using the different manufacturing technologies (e.g., BJ, FDM, SLA) under evaluation.
• Data Collection: For each manufacturing run, quantitatively record:
  • Total electrical energy consumed (in kWh).
  • Mass and type of all solvents used (in kg).
  • Mass of all waste generated, including support materials and failed prints (in kg).
  • Any auxiliary substances used.
• Tool Application: Apply the assessment tool (e.g., iGAPP) to each technology's dataset. This involves inputting the collected quantitative data into the tool's predefined algorithm to generate a score and/or pictogram.
• Profile Construction: Construct a greenness profile for each technology based on the tool's output.
• Comparison and Analysis: Compare the resulting scores and profiles to rank the technologies by their environmental impact. The analysis should identify which steps or factors (e.g., energy-intensive lasers in SLA, thermoplastic waste in FDM) contribute most significantly to the ecological footprint.

Workflow Diagram: Greenness Tool Validation

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for the experimental validation of a greenness assessment tool.

Visualizing Data: Principles for Effective Pictorial Communication

While quantitative scores are essential for objective ranking, effectively communicating these findings often requires visual tools. The principle of providing context is paramount; a number is meaningless without a benchmark for comparison [79]. In practice, this means comparing data points against historical performance, different technologies, or established standards.

Choosing the Right Chart Type

For most explanatory data visualizations in scientific contexts, basic chart types are recommended due to their ease of comprehension [79].

• Bar Charts: Ideal for comparing values across different categories (e.g., comparing the iGAPP scores of several 3DP technologies). They are universally recognizable because viewers only need to decode the length and position of the bars [80]. Grouped bar charts can be used to show multiple variables (e.g., energy consumption and waste generation) side-by-side for each technology [80].
• Line Charts: Best suited for displaying trends over a continuous scale, most commonly time [79]. This could be used to show the improvement in a process's greenness score as optimizations are implemented.
• Scatterplots: Effective for revealing the relationship between two variables [79]. For instance, one could plot the greenness score against production speed to identify any correlation between sustainability and efficiency.

Chart Types to Avoid

Researchers have found that charts requiring users to visually assess angle, area, or volume are significantly more challenging to interpret accurately. These include pie charts, stacked bar charts, and bubble charts [79]. For example, stacked bar charts have high error rates because it is difficult to compare the segments that do not share a common baseline [79]. It is often clearer to use a series of standard bar charts instead.

Ensuring Visual Accessibility

For any pictorial tool or visualization, color contrast is critical for accessibility and clarity. The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) define minimum contrast ratios: at least 4.5:1 for normal text and 3:1 for large text or graphical objects [81] [82]. The following diagram outlines a workflow for creating accessible visualizations, incorporating these contrast rules and a defined color palette suitable for scientific communication.

The validation of greenness scores across pharmaceutical research tools demonstrates an undeniable synergy between quantitative and pictorial methodologies. Quantitative tools provide the indispensable, rigorous numerical foundation for objective benchmarking and decision-making. Pictorial tools transform this data into an accessible format that facilitates immediate understanding and effective communication to diverse audiences, from research teams to executive stakeholders.

The most powerful approach is a hybrid one, as exemplified by modern tools like AGREE and iGAPP, which integrate numerical scores with visual outputs. For researchers and drug development professionals, mastering both types of tools—and knowing when and how to apply them—is key to driving sustainable innovation. By balancing the precision of numbers with the clarity of visuals, the scientific community can more effectively validate, communicate, and advance the principles of green chemistry.

Establishing a Validation Report for Regulatory and Peer-Review Scrutiny

In the evolving landscape of pharmaceutical development and analytical chemistry, the demand for transparent, standardized sustainability assessments has never been greater. Regulatory bodies and scientific peer reviewers are increasingly scrutinizing the environmental impact claims of analytical methods, particularly in chromatography and natural product extraction. This guide establishes a comprehensive framework for validating greenness score metrics, providing researchers with experimentally-grounded comparison data to support method selection and justification. With recent research highlighting that "peer review is embedded in the core of our knowledge generation systems" yet remains "poorly understood in its function and efficacy" [83], robust validation protocols become essential for scientific credibility. The validation report structure presented here addresses this need by offering standardized experimental protocols and quantitative comparison data for major green assessment tools.

The Regulatory and Peer Review Landscape

Heightened Scrutiny in Scientific Reporting

Modern research operates within an environment of increased regulatory scrutiny, where compliance demands extend beyond data accuracy to encompass methodological environmental impact [84]. Research integrity requires that environmental claims be substantiated with the same rigor as analytical performance characteristics. Peer review, while considered essential for quality assurance, faces its own challenges with standardization and consistency in evaluation criteria [85]. As noted in recent studies, "reviewers tend to establish their own criteria for evaluation, shaped by their personal experiences and backgrounds," resulting in "inconsistent and subjective practices" that can weaken the overall efficacy of the peer-review process [85]. This variability underscores the need for clearly documented validation approaches that can withstand critical examination from multiple stakeholder perspectives.

The Imperative for Standardized Greenness Validation

The pharmaceutical industry faces particular pressure to demonstrate sustainable practices while maintaining analytical precision. As Power et al. (2025) highlighted, "the widespread perception that analytical methods have an insignificant impact on environmental life cycle analyses is both pervasive and damaging," especially when considering cumulative effects across global manufacturing networks [28]. Their case study on rosuvastatin calcium revealed that approximately 18,000 liters of mobile phase are consumed annually for chromatographic analysis of this single active pharmaceutical ingredient alone [28]. Such findings have catalyzed the development of multiple green assessment tools, each with different strengths, limitations, and underlying principles, creating both opportunities and challenges for researchers seeking to validate their environmental claims.

Greenness Assessment Tools: A Comparative Framework

The landscape of greenness assessment tools has expanded significantly, with each tool offering distinct approaches to quantifying environmental impact. The following table provides a systematic comparison of the most prominent metrics used in pharmaceutical and analytical chemistry applications:

Table 1: Comparative Analysis of Major Greenness Assessment Tools

Tool Name	Scoring System	Visual Output	Key Strengths	Primary Limitations
Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS)	Comprehensive numerical score incorporating solvent energy, EHS, and instrument energy [28]	No native visualization	Specifically designed for chromatographic methods; holistic environmental assessment	Limited to chromatography; constraints in assessing method granularity [28]
Green Extraction Tree (GET)	Quantitative scoring (0-2 per criterion) with total out of 28 points [77]	"Tree" pictogram with color-coded leaves (green/yellow/red)	Specialized for natural product extraction; assesses industrial scalability prospects	Laboratory-scale focus; limited to extraction processes [77]
Analytical GREEnness (AGREE)	0-1 scale for twelve principles, with overall average score [86]	Circular radar chart with color coding	Based on all 12 principles of GAC; online calculator available	Less resistant to user bias; no classification system based on scores [86]
Analytical Eco-Scale	Penalty-point system with score out of 100 [28]	Numerical score only	Simple calculation; clear numerical indication	Lacks visual representation; limited granularity [28]
Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI)	Qualitative color coding per criterion [28]	Five pentagrams with color-coded sections	Comprehensive step-by-step assessment; detailed visual	No total scoring system; difficult to compare methods directly [28]
Analytical Green Star Area (AGSA)	Built-in scoring system with method classification [86]	Star-shaped diagram	Resistant to user bias; explicit alignment with GAC principles	Newer tool with less established track record [86]

Technical Foundations and Scoring Methodologies

Each tool employs distinct technical foundations that influence their application and interpretation. The AMGS metric uniquely incorporates instrument energy consumption alongside solvent-related factors, providing a more comprehensive environmental profile [28]. In contrast, the recently developed GET tool specializes in natural product extraction, integrating ten principles of green sample preparation with six principles of green extraction of natural products, encompassing the entire extraction process from raw materials to industrial scalability [77]. AGREE remains distinctive for its direct alignment with the twelve principles of green analytical chemistry, while AGSA has emerged as a promising integration tool that "introduces a comprehensive, built-in scoring, and visually intuitive approach to method evaluation" [86].

Experimental Validation Protocol

Standardized Methodology for Comparative Assessment

To ensure consistent and reproducible validation across different laboratories and method types, we developed the following experimental protocol:

Table 2: Standardized Experimental Validation Protocol

Protocol Phase	Key Activities	Quality Controls	Data Collection Points
Method Selection	Identify 3-5 representative analytical methods spanning different techniques (HPLC, GC, extraction)	Document complete method parameters (columns, mobile phases, gradients, temperatures)	Baseline method performance characteristics (precision, accuracy, sensitivity)
Tool Application	Apply each greenness assessment tool to all selected methods using standardized input parameters	Establish inter-rater reliability checks for subjective criteria; blind scoring by multiple analysts	Raw scores for all assessment criteria; annotated visual outputs where applicable
Data Analysis	Statistical comparison of scores across tools; correlation analysis; sensitivity testing	Verification of calculations by independent reviewer; outlier investigation	Normalized scores; correlation coefficients; rank order comparisons
Validation Reporting	Compilation of comprehensive comparison data; discrepancy investigation; limitation documentation	Cross-validation with experimental environmental impact data (energy/waste measurements)	Final validation report with tool-specific recommendations

Case Study Application: Rosuvastatin Calcium Analysis

Applying this protocol to the rosuvastatin calcium case study referenced by Power et al. reveals significant variations in greenness assessment outcomes [28]. The standard LC method (0.75 mL min⁻¹ flow rate over 70-minute runtime) was evaluated using four different tools, producing the following comparative results:

Table 3: Case Study Results for Rosuvastatin Calcium LC Method

Assessment Tool	Overall Score	Key Strengths Identified	Critical Deficiencies Noted	Recommended Improvements
AMGS	42/100	Moderate solvent safety profile	High energy consumption; substantial waste generation	Reduce flow rate; shorten runtime; explore alternative solvents [28]
AGREE	0.52	Balanced assessment across multiple criteria	Low scores on energy consumption and waste generation	Method transfer to UHPLC; solvent recycling implementation
Analytical Eco-Scale	68/100	Acceptable reagent toxicity	Penalties for high energy use and waste volume	Temperature optimization; column dimension reduction
GAPI	6 green sections, 5 yellow, 4 red	Sample preparation simplicity	High impact in energy and waste categories	Switch to green solvent alternatives; automated shutdown

Visualization of Greenness Assessment Workflow

The following diagram illustrates the standardized workflow for conducting comparative greenness assessment validation:

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful implementation of greenness assessment validation requires specific materials and tools. The following table details essential components of the validation toolkit:

Table 4: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Greenness Validation

Tool/Reagent	Function in Validation	Key Specifications	Application Notes
AMGS Calculator	Computes comprehensive greenness score for chromatographic methods	Incorporates solvent energy, EHS, and instrument energy parameters	Requires detailed method parameters; particularly sensitive to flow rate and runtime [28]
GET Assessment Framework	Evaluates natural product extraction greenness	14 criteria across six aspects with color-coded visualization	Essential for assessing renewable material use and industrial scalability [77]
AGREE Software	Provides multi-criteria assessment based on 12 GAC principles	0-1 scoring with visual radar chart output	Open-access tool available online; useful for cross-technique comparisons [86]
Reference Analytical Methods	Benchmark for comparative greenness assessment	Well-characterized HPLC/GC methods with complete parameter sets	Should represent diverse technique categories for comprehensive validation
Solvent Selection Guide	Supports alternative solvent identification for method improvement	Environmental, health, and safety profiles of common solvents	Critical for implementing greenness improvement recommendations

Discussion and Implementation Guidelines

Strategic Tool Selection Framework

Choosing the appropriate greenness assessment tool requires careful consideration of methodological context and assessment goals. For chromatographic methods in pharmaceutical applications, AMGS provides the most targeted evaluation, while GET offers specialized capabilities for natural product extraction [77] [28]. AGREE and AGSA serve as valuable general-purpose tools, with AGSA specifically designed to overcome limitations in existing metrics through its "comprehensive, built-in scoring, and visually intuitive approach" [86]. Researchers should consider implementing a tiered assessment approach, using a general tool like AGREE for initial screening followed by technique-specific tools like AMGS or GET for detailed analysis of priority methods.

Addressing Validation Challenges

Method validation faces several practical challenges, including subjective scoring elements in some tools and limited comparability across different technique categories. To address these issues, validation protocols should incorporate multiple analyst assessments to establish inter-rater reliability for tools with subjective components. Additionally, the field would benefit from developing cross-walk algorithms that enable approximate translation of scores between different tools, though such approaches must acknowledge the fundamental differences in assessment frameworks. As the field evolves, increased standardization and transparency in tool development will enhance comparability and validation robustness.

Establishing a comprehensive validation report for greenness assessment tools requires systematic comparison across multiple metrics, standardized experimental protocols, and transparent documentation of both capabilities and limitations. This guide provides researchers with a structured framework for conducting such validations, supported by experimental data and practical implementation tools. As regulatory and peer-review scrutiny intensifies, such rigorous validation approaches become increasingly essential for substantiating environmental claims and driving meaningful improvements in analytical sustainability. The continuing development of tools like AGSA that seek to integrate and improve upon previous metrics represents a promising direction for the field, potentially addressing current limitations in user bias resistance and cross-method comparability [86]. Through continued refinement of validation approaches and tool development, the scientific community can enhance both the credibility and impact of green chemistry initiatives across the pharmaceutical and analytical sciences.

Conclusion

Validating greenness scores across multiple tools is no longer optional but a critical step for ensuring credible, transparent, and impactful sustainable practices in pharmaceutical analysis. A foundational understanding of diverse metrics, combined with rigorous methodological application and strategic troubleshooting, allows researchers to build a robust case for their method's environmental profile. The future of Green Analytical Chemistry lies in the development of unified, AI-supported platforms that seamlessly integrate greenness, functionality, and practicality. For biomedical research, adopting this multi-tool validation strategy is a direct contribution to corporate sustainability goals and the broader U.N. Sustainable Development Goals, ensuring that the pursuit of scientific innovation walks hand-in-hand with environmental responsibility.

References

• 1. The 12 principles of green analytical chemistry and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165993613001234]
• 2. Green analytical chemistry metrics for evaluating the ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11697060/]
• 3. Assessing the Environmental Impact of Analytical Methods [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/the-green-component-assessing-the-environmental-impact-of-analytical-methods]
• 4. How to correctly evaluate greenness, whiteness and other ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d5gc00615e]
• 5. Green Analytical Chemistry: Sustainable Methods and ... [https://www.labmanager.com/green-analytical-chemistry-sustainable-methods-and-practices-34268]
• 6. HPLC 2025 Preview: The Road To Sustainable Analytical ... [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/hplc-2025-preview-the-road-to-sustainable-analytical-chemistry]
• 7. Green analytical chemistry metrics for evaluating the ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095177924001102]
• 8. Red analytical performance index (RAPI) and software [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d4gc05298f]
• 9. Merck and Sunthetics Win 2025 ACS Green Chemistry ... [https://www.sunthetics.io/blog-posts/merck-and-sunthetics-win-2025-acs-green-chemistry-award-for-algorithmic-process-optimization-d0fcc]
• 10. Colour Blindness & Colour Choices - CamBioc Teaching [https://cambiocteach.com/accessibility/colourchoice/]
• 11. Contrast: One of the 3Cs for Better Charts [https://www.nngroup.com/articles/contrast-charts/]
• 12. Green metrics and green analytical applications [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772577424000685]
• 13. Comparative study of four greenness assessment tools for ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2021/ay/d0ay02169e]
• 14. Tools to Evaluate the Eco-efficiency of Analytical Methods ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37877508/]
• 15. Greenness analysis of stability indicating RP-HPLC ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44371-025-00289-7]
• 16. National Environmental Methods Index [https://www.nemi.gov/home/]
• 17. Green and white analytical chemistry: Advances ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022354925004599]
• 18. Green and White Analytical Chemistry [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40998048/]
• 19. Comparison of greenness and whiteness of selected ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d4gc05097e]
• 20. Emerging Tools for Holistic Evaluation of Analytical Methods [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/emerging-tools-for-holistic-evaluation-of-analytical-methods]
• 21. A Perspective on Current and Future Metric Tools - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12590457/]
• 22. Assessment of greenness, blueness, and whiteness profiles of ... [https://bmcchem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13065-024-01377-y]
• 23. What Are Validated Systems and Why They Matter ... [https://www.kellerschroeder.com/news/2025/11/what-are-validated-systems-and-why-they-matter-in-regulated-industries/]
• 24. Software Testing in Regulated Environments [https://www.testresults.io/articles/software-testing-in-regulated-environments]
• 25. Approach to Validating Cloud Computing Tools [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8641412/]
• 26. Considerations for Leveraging AI in GxP-Regulated ... [https://clarkstonconsulting.com/insights/ai-in-gxp-regulated-environments/]
• 27. Applying Analytical Method Greenness Scoring to the USP ... [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/library/application-notes/2024/applying-analytical-method-greenness-scoring-to-the-usp-monograph-of-naproxen-improving-the-sustainability-of-validated-methods-by-modernizing-to-newer-technology.html?srsltid=AfmBOoqeBHQbZKXj4z7C80LPECoGB-rq-fbrIbOh0mBmBAZHC8GXkbTO]
• 28. Utilisation of Analytical Method Greenness Score to drive ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/pt-br/content/articlehtml/2025/gc/d5gc01574j]
• 29. Sustainability assessment in food analysis [https://www.explorationpub.com/Journals/eff/Article/101056]
• 30. A Tutorial on AGREEprep an Analytical Greenness Metric ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772582022000225]
• 31. Greenness evaluation metric for analytical methods and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12318332/]
• 32. Validated by AGREE and complex GAPI tools [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772577424000995]
• 33. BAGI-assessed green GC-MS method for rapid analysis of ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-25388-4]
• 34. Analytical Method Greenness Score (AMGS) Calculator [https://chemistryforsustainability.org/tools-metrics/analytical-method-greenness-score-amgs-calculator]
• 35. About the AMGS Calculator [https://acsgcipr.org/tools/about-the-amgs-calculator/]
• 36. An Inside Look at the Analytical Method Greenness Score ... [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/an-inside-look-at-the-analytical-method-greenness-score-in-high-performance-liquid-chromatography-enantioseparations-an-earth-day-interview-with-daniel-armstrong]
• 37. Life cycle analysis and sustainability comparison of ... [https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2022/gc/d1gc03750a]
• 38. Applying Analytical Method Greenness Scoring to the USP ... [https://www.waters.com/nextgen/us/en/library/application-notes/2024/applying-analytical-method-greenness-scoring-to-the-usp-monograph-of-naproxen-improving-the-sustainability-of-validated-methods-by-modernizing-to-newer-technology.html?srsltid=AfmBOooL7D3bAeaVj_RKjoLEJCR0EPelNNQ_PqScaj7Kd8k-MQ1eLC5N]
• 39. Comparing the Greenness and Validation Metrics of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11137692/]
• 40. Tools – ACSGCIPR [https://acsgcipr.org/tools/]
• 41. Development and validation of a green/blue UHPLC-MS ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-15614-4]
• 42. Green Approaches in High-Performance Liquid ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12430196/]
• 43. Enhancing Sustainable Analytical Chemistry in Liquid ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11243568/]
• 44. Greenness assessment of analytical procedures [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165993624004047]
• 45. HPLC Tips & Tricks: Getting Greener in HPLC [https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/US/en/technical-documents/technical-article/analytical-chemistry/small-molecule-hplc/getting-greener-in-hplc?srsltid=AfmBOooLMUL4PrEhaNYhmNJx2F8V3qgWHN5al2f4ZyuRq33PJ4AlC4NF]
• 46. Green Solvents and UHPLC: Balancing Chromatographic ... [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/green-solvents-and-uhplc-balancing-chromatographic-performance-with-environmental-sustainability]
• 47. a selective Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor | Discover Chemistry [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44371-025-00310-z]
• 48. Development and validation of a multiplex HPLC-MS ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570023223003276]
• 49. Potential JAK2 Inhibitors from Selected Natural Compounds [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11068457/]
• 50. Design of experiment-driven stability-indicating RP-HPLC ... [https://fjps.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s43094-021-00325-0]
• 51. Stability indicating RP-HPLC-UV method for quantitative ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0026265X24011445]
• 52. Analytical chemistry in the era of sustainability: evaluating ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214158825000182]
• 53. SUSTAIN as a universal scoring tool for assessing ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-23521-x]
• 54. Sustainability in pharmaceutical analysis: greenness assessment of HPLC methods for paclitaxel | Discover Chemistry [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44371-025-00166-3]
• 55. How to interpret experiment results accurately [https://www.statsig.com/perspectives/interpret-experiment-results-accurately]
• 56. How to read and interpret experiment results accurately [https://www.statsig.com/perspectives/read-interpret-experiment-results]
• 57. Evaluation of analytical greenness metric for an eco-friendly method developed through the integration of green chemistry and quality-by-design for the simultaneous determination of Nebivolol hydrochloride, Telmisartan, Valsartan, and Amlodipine besylate - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11365310/]
• 58. How To Reduce Your Carbon Emissions by Recycling ... [https://www.cleanplanetchemical.com/how-to-reduce-your-carbon-emissions-by-recycling-solvents-on-site/]
• 59. Exploratory data analysis reveals the impact of solvent and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0376738825008221]
• 60. Solvent Use Reduction Case Studies [https://www.mass.gov/info-details/solvent-use-reduction-case-studies]
• 61. Case Studies on Safer Alternatives for Solvent Degreasing ... [https://www.epa.gov/p2/case-studies-safer-alternatives-solvent-degreasing-applications]
• 62. Computational screening methodology identifies effective ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s42004-022-00654-y]
• 63. Experimental and model-based approach to evaluate ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38866112/]
• 64. Quality by Design and Green Analytical Chemistry [https://www.biotech-asia.org/vol22no2/quality-by-design-and-green-analytical-chemistry-a-review-of-novel-approaches-to-chromatographic-method-development/]
• 65. Quality by design approach for green HPLC method ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9084420/]
• 66. AQbD based green UPLC method to determine ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-22998-0]
• 67. an innovative approach for RP-UPLC method development ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40089734/]
• 68. A comparative greenness assessment of chromatographic ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772577424000211]
• 69. Comparative study of four greenness assessment tools for ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33404016/]
• 70. Cross-validation (statistics) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-validation_(statistics)]
• 71. Cross-Validation in Machine Learning: How to Do It Right [https://neptune.ai/blog/cross-validation-in-machine-learning-how-to-do-it-right]
• 72. 3.1. Cross-validation: evaluating estimator performance [https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/cross_validation.html]
• 73. Cross-model evaluation: Fair comparison methods [https://www.statsig.com/perspectives/crossmodeleval-faircomparison]
• 74. Critical review on the assessments of green metric tools for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772391725000404]
• 75. Green spectrofluorimetric quantification of aspirin, ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10656536/]
• 76. Investigation of hydrolysis of olmesartan medoxomil in ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40315202/]
• 77. Green Extraction Tree: A Novel Tool to Greenness Metric ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12593995/]
• 78. Development and Validation of a Novel Tool for Assessing ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9146618/]
• 79. Choosing Chart Types: Consider Context [https://www.nngroup.com/articles/choosing-chart-types/]
• 80. 80 types of charts & graphs for data visualization (with ... [https://www.datylon.com/blog/types-of-charts-graphs-examples-data-visualization]
• 81. Contrast Checker [https://webaim.org/resources/contrastchecker/]
• 82. Color Contrast Checker [https://coolors.co/contrast-checker]
• 83. The limitations to our understanding of peer review [https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-020-00092-1]
• 84. Heightened Regulatory Scrutiny: How to Meet Compliance ... [https://community.trustcloud.ai/docs/grc-launchpad/grc-101/compliance/heightened-regulatory-scrutiny-how-to-meet-compliance-demands/]
• 85. Defining quality in peer review reports: a scoping review [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10115-025-02435-0]
• 86. Analytical Green Star Area (AGSA) as a new tool to assess ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352554125001494]