The pharmacokinetics of DPH after the administration of a single intravenous or intramuscular dose in healthy dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine the pharmacokinetics of diphenhydramine (DPH) in healthy dogs following a single i.v. or i.m. dose. Dogs were randomly allocated in two treatment groups and received DPH at 1 mg/kg, i.v., or 2 mg/kg, i.m. Blood samples were collected serially over 24 h. Plasma concentrations of DPH were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography, and noncompartmental pharmacokinetic analysis was performed with the commercially available software. Cardio-respiratory parameters, rectal temperature and effects on behaviour, such as sedation or excitement, were recorded. Diphenhydramine Clarea , Vdarea and T1/2 were 20.7 ± 2.9 mL/kg/min, 7.6 ± 0.7 L/kg and 4.2 ± 0.5 h for the i.v. route, respectively, and Clarea /F, Vdarea /F and T1/2 20.8 ± 2.7 mL/kg/min, 12.3 ± 1.2 L/kg and 6.8 ± 0.7 h for the i.m. route, respectively. Bioavailability was 88% after i.m. administration. No significant differences were found in physiological parameters between groups or within dogs of the same group, and values remained within normal limits. No adverse effects or changes in mental status were observed after the administration of DPH. Both routes of administration resulted in DPH plasma concentrations which exceeded levels considered therapeutic in humans.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".