MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973801557 · doi:10.1080/10731190902742455

Use of the Labscale Tangential Flow Diafiltrator to Remove Tetrameric Hemoglobin from Polyhemoglobin, Purify Hemolysate, and Concentrate Polyhemoglobin

2009· article· en· W1973801557 on OpenAlexafffund
Ada Stefanescu, Thomas Ming Swi Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial Cells Blood Substitutes and Biotechnology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHemoglobin structure and function
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHemoglobinFiltration (mathematics)DiafiltrationChromatographyChemistryVolumetric flow rateStructural integrityBiomedical engineeringMathematicsBiochemistryMembraneMechanicsMicrofiltrationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Labscale tangential flow diafiltration system in conjunction with polyethersulfone Biomax filters (both purchased from Millipore Inc.) were used in the following studies: (1) A crucial step in the preparation of polyhemoglobin (polyHb) is the removal of tetrameric hemoglobin (Hb), which can cause adverse side-effects. The efficiency for this depends on the integrity of the 100kDa filters. Those with lower integrity were not effective whereas those with a higher integrity of 0.075ml/min were more effective. A filter with an integrity of 0.075ml/min can reduce the initial 11.2% tetrameric Hb concentration to 1.3% using a flow rate of 0.2ml/min. Higher flow rate of 2.2ml/min was not as effective. (2) Filtration with a 100kDa filter was quick and efficient in separating stroma-free hemoglobin solutions from cellular debris from hemolysate. (3) Both 5kDa and 100kDa filters are efficient in concentrating hemoglobin solutions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.189 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArtificial Cells Blood Substitutes and BiotechnologySame topicHemoglobin structure and functionFrench-language works237,207