MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033254494 · doi:10.1089/jam.2004.17.335

Next Generation Pharmaceutical Impactor: A New Impactor for Pharmaceutical Inhaler Testing. Part III. Extension of Archival Calibration to 15 L/min

2004· article· en· W2033254494 on OpenAlexaff
Virgil A. Marple, Bernard A. Olson, Kumaragovindhan Santhanakrishnan, Daryl L. Roberts, Jolyon P. Mitchell, Buffy Hudson‐Curtis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aerosol Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsTrudell Medical International (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNebulizerAerosolCalibrationVolumetric flow rateParticle sizeDispersitySeparator (oil production)Materials scienceSizingChromatographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryMechanicsMathematicsPhysicsChemical engineeringEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An extension of the archival calibration of the recently developed 30-100-L/min seven-stage impactor, the Next Generation Pharmaceutical Impactor (NGI), has been undertaken at 15 L/min. The NGI stage cut sizes are 0.98-14.1 microm aerodynamic diameter at this flow rate. This 15-L/min calibration was motivated by the desire to sample the entire aerosol produced by a nebulizer when tested in accordance with a new international standard developed by the Comite Européen de Normalisation (CEN), as well as the need to test various types of inhalers at flow rates lower than 30 L/min for pediatric applications. Measurements were undertaken with monodisperse oleic acid droplets in the range of 0.7-22 microm aerodynamic diameter following a procedure established in the original 30-100-L/min calibration study. The NGI was found to be effective for particle size separation at 15 L/min. Users should decide the most applicable configuration that meets their needs, based on the following recommendations: (1) the pre-separator should not normally be used, as its performance is significantly degraded by the influence of gravity, resulting in interference with stage 1; and (2) a filter should be inserted below the micro-orifice collector (MOC), as the size corresponding to 80% collection efficiency of the MOC becomes excessively large with decreasing flow rate, so that this component becomes ineffective as a means of collecting fine particles that penetrate beyond stage 7.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations116
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aerosol MedicineSame topicInhalation and Respiratory Drug DeliveryFrench-language works237,207