Effects of contrast media on erythrocyte aggregation during sedimentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the effects of contrast media (CMs) on erythrocyte aggregation, we measured the erythrocyte sedimentation with Westergren method at 25 degrees C. CMs were diatrizoate (Urografin 76%) for ionic CM and iopamidol (Iopamiron 370) for nonionic CM. Swine red blood cells (RBCs) were suspended in autologous plasma containing diatrizoate (URO), iopamidol (IOP), and saline (SAL) at 6.7% w/w, as well as in plasma alone (PLA), at 40% of the hematocrit. Sigmoid sedimentation curves were fitted to the Puccini et al. (1977) equation, and the average number of RBCs per aggregate m was calculated by Stokes' law against the time t. According to the Murata-Secomb (1988) theory we estimated the collision rate K between two aggregates from dm/dt in the stationary phase during sedimentation. Corresponding to the maximal ESR, the dm/dt (in cells/s) was 0.52 in PLA, 0.09 in SAL, 0.06 in URO and 0.03 in IOP, so that K also decreased in proportion to dm/dt from 145 fL/s in PLA to 8 fL/s in IOP. Both the ionic and nonionic CMs tend to inhibit the RBC aggregation more than that in SAL; the latter iopamidol appears to be inhibitory more than the former diatrizoate in autologous plasma.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".