Bibliographic record
Abstract
The terms of the Montreal Protocol have eliminated chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other ozone-depleting agents from commercial use, with the exemption of their use as propellants in metered-dose inhalers. Two new propellants have been approved for CFC substitutes: hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-134a and HFA-227. An extensive safety program was conducted by the International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium for Toxicity Testing (IPACT studies I and II), which found that the HFAs were as safe as or safer than the CFCs. The change from CFCs to HFAs in metered-dose inhalers was not a straightforward exchange. Indeed, substantial new technology had to be developed to make the HFAs suitable for use in metered-dose inhalers. Fortunately, with new understandings of respiratory diseases and the areas of the lungs that need to be targeted by medications, the new HFAs provided the opportunity to improve the performance of the beta-agonist products and created some entirely new ability for inhaled steroids to reach all the airways, both large and small, where asthma pathology resides. The transition from CFCs also spurred novel new drug-delivery technologies, improved dry powder inhalers, and highly dispersible engineered powders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".