MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134169738 · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.179.12.1166a

Evidence for Airway Acidity and Oxidative Stress in Exhaled Breath Condensates from Grain Workers

2009· letter· en· W2134169738 on OpenAlexaff
Ron Do, Karen H. Bartlett, Helen Dimich‐Ward, Chiu‐Wing Winnie Chu, Susan Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2009
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhaled breath condensateSalivaMedicineContaminationSputumEnvironmental chemistryAirwayFood scienceAnimal scienceInternal medicineChemistryPathologyAnesthesiaAsthmaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In their article, Dr. Do and colleagues described exhaled breath condensate (EBC) studies that they interpret to indicate airway acidity and oxidative stress (8-isoprostane) in grain workers (1). Unfortunately, neither of these conclusions can be drawn on the basis of the data they have collected. With regard to pH, the species NH4 1 and HCO3 2 represent approximately 90% of the acids and bases found in most samples of EBC (2). Generation of approximately 90% of the NH4 1 is in the mouth rather than the airways, much of it from bacterial degradation of urea (3). Low concentrations of volatile organic acids (e.g., acetic acid) may be found in EBC, but these may also represent oral contamination. Abnormal EBC pH probably reflects oral rather than airway metabolism (3), and the pH and constituents of saliva should have been measured. Furthermore, the investigators did not measure amylase concentrations in the EBC to detect direct salivary contamination, which is more likely because the condenser they used is close to the mouth during collection. Filtering the EBC is not well justified in the article and had no effect. Furthermore, exposure of the samples to argon leaves behind much of the CO2/HCO3 2 and may cause loss of other volatile acids and bases. Interpretation of EBC pH is problematical because the buffering capacity of the EBC was not measured. Condensates should not be used to collect volatile constituents such as NH3 since recovery of these solutes in the aqueous phase can be influenced by local pH, temperature, airflow, and turbulence in airways and condensers. With regard to isoprostane, EBC concentrations of isoprostane cannot be reliably used to estimate either concentrations or changes in concentrations of isoprostane in the airways unless a dilutional indicator is also measured (e.g., conductivity of lyophilized samples, which is readily measured with simple equipment) (4). Increased 8-isoprostane concentrations may reflect the production of more respiratory droplets in the airways rather than increased concentrations in the airway fluid. EBC concentrations of nonvolatiles are approximately 1% those in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and 0.01% those in respiratory fluids. It is therefore puzzling that EBC 8-isoprostane levels in the normals of Do and coworkers (z10 pg/mL) are nearly the same as those reported in BAL by others (5). The EBC approach holds the promise that airway constituents may be measured noninvasively, but oral contamination with volatile solutes and extreme and variable dilution by water vapor from the airways must be experimentally addressed in all studies of this sort.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207