MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091656349 · doi:10.1081/jlc-100103440

SOLID-PHASE EXTRACTION WITH HPLC-DAD SELECTIVE DETECTION OF AMITRIPTYLINE AND NORTRIPTYLINE IN HUMAN BREAST MILK

2001· article· en· W2091656349 on OpenAlexaff
Marie-Sophie Caubet, A. Millaret, Walid Elbast, J. L. Brazier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Liquid Chromatography & Related Technologies · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPharmacological Effects and Assays
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNortriptylineChromatographyChemistryDetection limitSolid phase extractionAmmonium acetateHigh-performance liquid chromatographyCalibration curveExtraction (chemistry)Chromatography detectorAmitriptylinePharmacologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A simple, rapid, highly selective and sensitive method was developed to determine concentrations of amitriptyline and nortriptyline in human breast milk, using high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with a diode-array detector (DAD). Drugs were effectively extracted from 250 L of milk by a solid phase extraction procedure on a polymeric sorbent-C18-based cartridge. The separation was carried out on a Eclipse XDB-C18 reversed phase column (30 mm × 4.6 mm, 3.5 m particle size) using the mobile phase composed of acetonitrile and ammonium acetate 0.1M (33/67, v/v). Imipramine was used as internal standard. Calibration functions were linear in the calibration range of 60–300 ng.mL−1. The lower limit of detection was 1.9 ng.mL−1 for both compounds. The recoveries were 92% for amitriptyline and 89% for nortriptyline. Since no method have been reported in the literature for the dosage of these two drugs in breast milk, this method could be useful, particularly, when evaluating the potential risk for the neonate during the lactation period.

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)0.001
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Liquid Chromatography & Related TechnologiesSame topicPharmacological Effects and AssaysFrench-language works237,207