MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111372021 · doi:10.1002/bmc.3485

Assessment of tandem mass spectrometry and high‐resolution mass spectrometry for the analysis of bupivacaine in plasma

2015· article· en· W2111372021 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Chromatography · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryChromatographyMass spectrometryReproducibilityResolution (logic)Analytical Chemistry (journal)Accuracy and precisionQuantitative analysis (chemistry)Tandem mass spectrometrySelected reaction monitoringCoefficient of variationMetaboliteCorrelation coefficientTriple quadrupole mass spectrometerLiquid chromatography–mass spectrometryStatisticsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Triple quadrupole mass spectrometers coupled with high performance liquid chromatography are workhorses in quantitative bioanalyses. They provide substantial benefits including reproducibility, sensitivity and selectivity for trace analysis. Selected reaction monitoring allows targeted assay development but datasets generated contain very limited information. Data mining and analysis of nontargeted high-resolution mass spectrometry profiles of biological samples offer the opportunity to perform more exhaustive assessments, including quantitative and qualitative analysis. The objectives of this study were to test method precision and accuracy, to statistically compare bupivacaine drug concentration in real study samples and to verify if high-resolution and accurate mass data collected in scan mode can actually permit retrospective data analysis, more specifically, extract metabolite related information. The precision and accuracy data presented using both instruments provided equivalent results. Overall, the accuracy ranged from 106.2 to 113.2% and the precision observed was from 1.0 to 3.7%. Statistical comparisons using a linear regression between both methods revealed a coefficient of determination (R(2)) of 0.9996 and a slope of 1.02, demonstrating a very strong correlation between the two methods. Individual sample comparison showed differences from -4.5 to 1.6%, well within the accepted analytical error. Moreover, post-acquisition extracted ion chromatograms at m/z 233.1648 ± 5 ppm (M - 56) and m/z 305.2224 ± 5 ppm (M + 16) revealed the presence of desbutyl-bupivacaine and three distinct hydroxylated bupivacaine metabolites. Post-acquisition analysis allowed us to produce semi-quantitative evaluations of the concentration-time profiles for bupicavaine metabolites.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.271 · 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