MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107949395 · doi:10.1089/089426803769017677

The Effect of Breathing Pattern on Nebulizer Drug Delivery

2003· article· en· W2107949395 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aerosol Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhalationNebulizerBreathingInhalationAnesthesiaVentilation (architecture)Tidal volumeBiomedical engineeringMedicineChemistryMathematicsRespiratory systemInternal medicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The significance of using breathing patterns with simplified functional shapes in vented jet nebulizer research is examined. This study is comprised of three parts: (1) The measurement and analysis of human breathing patterns, (2) the subsequent in vitro testing of the effects of breathing pattern differences using a consistent bench test method, and (3) a computer modeling of these effects on the estimated regional drug deposition in the human lung. Breathing through a Pari LC-Star nebulizer caused statistically significant changes (p < or = 0.05) in measured human breathing patterns when compared to normal breathing. Observed changes included an increase in the tidal volume (34%) and period (39%). Additionally, the average duty cycle shifted 12% towards a more symmetrical breath due to the unequal increase in the inhalation and exhalation times (55% and 28%, respectively). The position of the point of maximum flow in each breath phase shifted towards the beginning and end of the breath for the inhale and exhale by 28% and 48%, respectively. The bench testing revealed that breathing pattern shape variation caused statistically significant differences in nebulizer output only in two cases. Decreasing duty cycles and shifting the point of maximum flow towards the beginning of the breath both result in a decrease in output efficiency. Square flow patterns produced slight but consistently higher output efficiencies (average 2.1% higher) and a constant output particle size over the course of each breath, different from the other non-square patterns. Numerical simulations revealed no significant dosage differences resulting from breathing pattern shape variations. However, square wave patterns consistently produced slight overpredictions in comparison with real nebulizer patterns. In contrast, sine wave patterns were found to produce essentially the same results as nebulizer patterns in both the bench tests and in the deposition simulations. This suggests that sine wave shapes are preferable for simulating breathing when bench testing drug delivery using vented jet nebulizers.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · 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