MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125697166 · doi:10.4155/bio.10.65

Elimination of LC–MS/MS Matrix Effect Due to Phospholipids Using Specific Solid-Phase Extraction Elution Conditions

2010· article· en· W2125697166 on OpenAlexaff
Mathieu Lahaie, Jean‐Nicholas Mess, Milton Furtado, Fabio Garofolo

Bibliographic record

VenueBioanalysis · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPesticide Residue Analysis and Safety
Canadian institutionsBioPhage Pharma (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromatographySolid phase extractionChemistryElutionExtraction (chemistry)Matrix (chemical analysis)Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometryPhase (matter)Mass spectrometryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The objective is to find elution conditions using different solid-phase extraction chemistries to reduce the amount of phospholipids in plasma extract, which is associated with matrix effect in LC-MS. RESULTS: Phospholipids' recovery was reduced by decreasing the eluents' methanol content applied to silica-based and polymer-based reversed-phase solid-phase extraction cartridges while 100% acetonitrile applied to the silica-based cartridges drastically minimized the phospholipids' elution. Silanol interactions are involved in the increased retention of phospholipids with silica-based reversed-phase cartridges when using high percentages of ACN in eluents. The bioanalytical usefulness of these findings was confirmed by successful extraction recovery of pharmaceutical compounds. CONCLUSION: Combinations of specific eluents and reversed-phase solid-phase extraction cartridges were found to prevent matrix effect due to phospholipids.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.320 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations45
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioanalysisSame topicPesticide Residue Analysis and SafetyFrench-language works237,207