MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064619677 · doi:10.1021/ac049285e

Quantitation of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide in Urine Using Atmospheric Pressure Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry

2004· article· en· W2064619677 on OpenAlexafffund
Meng Cui, Margaret McCooeye, Catharine Fraser, Zoltán Mester

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryChromatographyMass spectrometryDetection limitAnalytical Chemistry (journal)UrineSelected ion monitoringMatrix (chemical analysis)Tandem mass spectrometryQuantitative analysis (chemistry)Ion trapGas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A quantitative method was developed for analysis of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) in urine using atmospheric pressure matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization ion trap mass spectrometry (AP MALDI-ITMS). Following solid-phase extraction of LSD from urine samples, extracts were analyzed by AP MALDI-ITMS. The identity of LSD was confirmed by fragmentation of the [M + H](+) ion using tandem mass spectrometry. The quantification of LSD was achieved using stable-isotope-labeled LSD (LSD-d(3)) as the internal standard. The [M + H](+) ion fragmented to produce a dominant fragment ion, which was used for a selected reaction monitoring (SRM) method for quantitative analysis of LSD. SRM was compared with selected ion monitoring and produced a wider linear range and lower limit of quantification. For SRM analysis of samples of LSD spiked in urine, the calibration curve was linear in the range of 1-100 ng/mL with a coefficient of determination, r(2), of 0.9917. This assay was used to determine LSD in urine samples and the AP MALDI-MS results were comparable to the HPLC/ ESI-MS results.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations22
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207