MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150516141 · doi:10.1002/dta.1788

Mildronate (Meldonium) in professional sports – monitoring doping control urine samples using hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography – high resolution/high accuracy mass spectrometry

2015· article· en· W2150516141 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Christian Görgens, Sven Guddat, Josef Dib, Hans Geyer, Wilhelm Schänzer, Mario Thevis

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug Testing and Analysis · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWorld Anti-Doping Agency
KeywordsAnalyteDrug detectionChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To date, substances such as Mildronate (Meldonium) are not on the radar of anti-doping laboratories as the compound is not explicitly classified as prohibited. However, the anti-ischemic drug Mildronate demonstrates an increase in endurance performance of athletes, improved rehabilitation after exercise, protection against stress, and enhanced activations of central nervous system (CNS) functions. In the present study, the existing evidence of Mildronate's usage in sport, which is arguably not (exclusively) based on medicinal reasons, is corroborated by unequivocal analytical data allowing the estimation of the prevalence and extent of misuse in professional sports. Such data are vital to support decision-making processes, particularly regarding the ban on drugs in sport. Due to the growing body of evidence (black market products and athlete statements) concerning its misuse in sport, adequate test methods for the reliable identification of Mildronate are required, especially since the substance has been added to the 2015 World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) monitoring program. In the present study, two approaches were established using an in-house synthesized labelled internal standard (Mildronate-D3 ). One aimed at the implementation of the analyte into routine doping control screening methods to enable its monitoring at the lowest possible additional workload for the laboratory, and another that is appropriate for the peculiar specifics of the analyte, allowing the unequivocal confirmation of findings using hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography-high resolution/high accuracy mass spectrometry (HILIC-HRMS). Here, according to applicable regulations in sports drug testing, a full qualitative validation was conducted. The assay demonstrated good specificity, robustness (rRT=0.3%), precision (intra-day: 7.0-8.4%; inter-day: 9.9-12.9%), excellent linearity (R>0.99) and an adequate lower limit of detection (<10 ng/mL).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
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

Citations60
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug Testing and AnalysisSame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207