MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100349498 · doi:10.1002/bmc.1132

Determination of urinary androgen glucuronides by capillary electrophoresis with electrospray tandem mass spectrometry

2008· article· en· W2100349498 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sung‐Hee Cho, Jeongae Lee, Man Ho Choi, Won‐Yong Lee, Bong Chul Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Chromatography · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKorea Institute of Science and TechnologyWorld Anti-Doping Agency
KeywordsChemistryChromatographyEpitestosteroneAndrosteroneDerivatizationTandem mass spectrometryMass spectrometryDetection limitCapillary electrophoresisCapillary electrophoresis–mass spectrometryElectrospray ionizationAndrogenSteroidBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Capillary electrophoresis-electrospray tandem mass spectrometry (CE-ESI/MS/MS) is a simple and highly sensitive method for quantifying seven urinary androgen glucuronides. The urine samples were diluted and filtered through a membrane filter, and the filtrate was injected into a CE-MS/MS system without further sample preparation steps such as extraction and derivatization. The calibration ranges were 0.01-5 microg/mL for glucuronides of androsterone and 11beta-OHAn-3G, and 5-500 ng/mL for glucuronides of 11-ketoAn, DHEA, testosterone, epitestosterone and DHT. The linearity of the method was 0.992-0.998, and the limits-of-detection at a signal-to-noise ratio of 3 were 5-10 ng/mL. The coefficients of variation were in the range of 4.0-9.0% for intra-day assay and 4.1-9.8% for inter-day assay. The proposed method may be applicable to metabolic profiling in both quantitative and qualitative analysis.

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 score0.004

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical ChromatographySame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207