MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999027093 · doi:10.1021/es901261v

Branched Perfluorooctane Sulfonate Isomer Quantification and Characterization in Blood Serum Samples by HPLC/ESI-MS(/MS)

2009· article· en· W1999027093 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole Riddell, Gilles Arsenault, Jonathan P. Benskin, Brock Chittim, Jonathan W. Martin, Alan J. McAlees, Robert McCrindle

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerfluorooctaneChemistryChromatographyEnvironmental chemistrySulfonateHuman bloodOrganic chemistryPhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) is a global contaminant and is currently among the most prominent contaminants in human blood and wildlife samples. Although "total PFOS" (SigmaPFOS) analytical methods continue to be the most commonly used for quantification, recent analytical method developments have made it possible to resolve the various isomers of PFOS by HPLC-MS/MS. Characterized technical PFOS standards (i.e., containing a mixture of PFOS isomers) are now available that enable isomer specific quantification of PFOS, however the advantages of such an analysis have notyet been examined systematically. Herein, PFOS isomers have been individually quantified for the first time in real samples and the results are compared to a traditional SigmaPFOS method; the influence of analytical standards and isomer specific electrospray and MS/ MS behavior were also investigated. The two human serum standard reference materials chosen for analysis contained dramaticallydifferent PFOS isomer profiles (approximately 30-50% total branched isomers) emphasizing that isomer patterns should not be ignored and may provide useful information on exposure sources (i.e., direct exposure to PFOS vs indirect exposure from PFOS-precursors). Depending on the sample and the particular MS/MS transition chosen for SigmaPFOS analysis (i.e., 499-->80 or 499-->99), SigmaPFOS concentrations may be over- or underestimated compared to the isomer specific analysis. Differences in the extent of in-source fragmentation and MS/MS dissociation contributed to the systematic analytical bias. It was also shown that SigmaPFOS data are prone to interlaboratory variation due to various choices of PFOS standards and instrumental conditions used. In the future, for either SigmaPFOS or isomer specific PFOS analyses, we suggest that accuracy can be maximized and interlaboratory discrepancies minimized by using a common chemically pure technical PFOS standard characterized by 19F NMR.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.233
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations119
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchFrench-language works237,207