MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Relative Variability in Bioavailability of Oral Controlled-Release Formulations of Oxycodone and Morphine

2001· article· en· W2003262031 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Therapeutics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Opioid Use
Canadian institutionsPurdue Pharma (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOxycodoneMorphineMedicineCmaxBioavailabilityAbsorption (acoustics)PharmacologyBioequivalenceImmediate releasePharmacokineticsControlled releaseArea under the curveAnesthesiaExtended releaseInternal medicineOpioid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A retrospective analysis compared the coefficients of variation associated with the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and the extent of absorption (area under the curve [AUC] from 0 hour to the last observation) for oral, controlled-release tablet formulations of oxycodone (OxyContin) and morphine (MS Contin). Data from fasting, male subjects aged 18 to 45 years were taken from five controlled-release oxycodone (N = 82) and seven controlled-release morphine (N = 101) single-dose, bioequivalence studies. The coefficients of variation of Cmax and AUC were approximately 33% less for controlled-release oxycodone than for controlled-release morphine (P =.005). The variation from the minimum to maximum value was two to three times less for controlled-release oxycodone than for controlled-release morphine. Among healthy male subjects, the absorption of oxycodone from oral controlled-release oxycodone was significantly more consistent than the absorption of morphine from oral controlled-release morphine in terms of both maximum absorption and extent of absorption.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.278 · 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