MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052892819 · doi:10.1080/10256010008032941

<sup>13</sup> C Basal Abundance of Expired CO <sub>2</sub> -Definition of Pre-Requisites for Kinetic Breath Tests

2000· article· en· W2052892819 on OpenAlexaff
Mélanie Dubuc, H. Sébastien, J. L. Brazier

Bibliographic record

VenueIsotopes in Environmental and Health Studies · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhalationIngestionBreath testNatural abundanceExpired airAbundance (ecology)ChemistryBasal (medicine)Orange juiceAnimal scienceFood scienceBiologyMedicineInternal medicineBiochemistryEcologyChromatographyMass spectrometryAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A sufficiently stable rate of 13CO2 exhalation is necessary when the diagnostic 13CO2 breath tests are performed in healthy subjects and patients. The aim of the research was to define prerequisite conditions for kinetic breath tests in order to ensure a stable 13CO2 background. A 3-part protocol was developed. Part I: a study of the one-day variation of 13CO2 abundance in expired CO2 confirmed that shifts of the basal 13C abundance in breath are inherent in nature. Part II: a study of the variations of 13C enrichment after the ingestion of different meals and beverages showed that ingestion of food items containing C4 plant sugars, such as maize, induces a significant increase in isotopic abundance. Part III: a new test breakfast containing rice grain cereal, milk and orange juice was tested. This test meal induces no significant change on the basal 13CO2 abundance in healthy subjects. This new finding allows to avoid the fasting period normally required prior to a breath test which is sometimes difficult for children and pregnant women.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations3
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIsotopes in Environmental and Health StudiesSame topicDiet and metabolism studiesFrench-language works237,207