Program to monitor surface contamination by methotrexate in a hematology–oncology satellite pharmacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The results of contamination monitoring during a one-year pilot period are described. SUMMARY: A hematology-oncology satellite pharmacy conducted contamination monitoring for one year, using methotrexate as the index marker. From January 12, 2005, to December 21, 2005, 40 sampling sessions occurred during which 238 wipe samples (excluding positive controls) were collected. Each week, seven wipe samples were prepared by pharmacy technicians. Samples were obtained from the blank reference (site 0), the external metallic window frame of the main biological safety cabinet (BSC) (site 1), the back of the phone receiver (site 2), the external surface of an i.v. solution bag that was inside the BSC the previous hour (site 3), a working surface used for the final packaging and labeling (site 4), and the floor of the preparation room (site 5). The sixth sample was a positive methotrexate control. The methotrexate was detected by a high-performance liquid chromatograph with a fluorometric detector. Five samples tested positive for methotrexate-two from site 1, one from site 2, one from site 4, and one from site 0 (the blank); the last finding was thought to have most likely been the result of an error or sample mix-up during the wipe-sampling procedures. Despite differences in the sampling methods used, the type of wetting solution used, and the volume of desorption solution, the results were consistent with the literature in terms of few positive results. CONCLUSION: A program was developed to monitor surface contamination by methotrexate in a hematology-oncology satellite pharmacy.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".