MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160799946 · doi:10.5779/hypothesis.v11i1.345

Removal of phosphine from bloodstream using hemoperfusion device consisting of metal-promoted carbon nanotubes

2013· article· en· W2160799946 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sayed Mahdi Marashi, Mohammad Majidi, Mehran Sadeghian, Reza Abdi, Hassan Sarhaddi

Bibliographic record

VenueHypothesis · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPoisoning and overdose treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemoperfusionPhosphineCarbon nanotubeMetalMaterials scienceNanotechnologyMetallurgyCatalysisChemistryOrganic chemistryMedicineSurgeryHemodialysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aluminum phosphide (AlP) self-poisoning leads to severe toxicity with a high mortality rate in developing coun- tries. No effective methods to treat se- vere AlP poisoning have been identified to date. It is surmised that toxic levels are blood concentrations above 1.067 mg%. In some instances of toxic exposure, char- coal hemoperfusion is an effective way to remove the poisonous substances from the circulation. However, it seems that ad- sorption of phosphine gas (PH 3 ), the toxic ingredient of AlP, by activated charcoal is not adequate and, therefore, it is unlikely that charcoal hemoperfusion would be ef- fective in treating AlP poisoning. Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are appropriate for supporting metal nanoparticles. Cobalt (Co) and cerium (Ce) nanoparticles sup- ported on CNTs (CoCe-CNTs) have cat- alytic properties in the phosphine decom- position reaction. We hypothesize that the substitution of charcoal with CoCe alloy supported on CNTs in hemoperfusion car- tridges can be used to remove PH 3 from the plasma compartment to cure ALP poi- soning. We believe it is possible for this novel extracorporeal technique to become an efficient method for PH 3 removal, en- hancing the patient's chance of survival.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypothesisSame topicPoisoning and overdose treatmentsFrench-language works237,207