MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2273790971 · doi:10.1002/dta.1956

Liposomes as potential masking agents in sport doping. Part 2: Detection of liposome‐entrapped haemoglobin by flow cytofluorimetry

2016· article· en· W2273790971 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Simone Esposito, Sonia Colicchia, Xavier de la Torre, Francesco Donati, Monica Mazzarino, Francesco Botrè

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug Testing and Analysis · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHemoglobin structure and function
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWorld Anti-Doping Agency
KeywordsLiposomeEthylene glycolChemistryChromatographyPEG ratioStreptavidinConjugated systemBiochemistryBiotinOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents an analytical procedure for the identification and characterization of liposome-entrapped haemoglobins, based on flow cytofluorimetry. Flow cytofluorimetric detection is carried out following labelling by two distinct fluorescent reagents, an anti-haemoglobin antibody, fluorescein isothiocyanate conjugated, and an anti-poly(ethylene glycol) antibody, streptavidin-phycoerythrin conjugated. This experimental strategy allows the detection of liposome-entrapped haemoglobins in aqueous media, including plasma; the efficacy of the proposed approach has been verified on whole blood samples added with the liposomal formulation (ex-vivo). Additionally, the proposed technique allows the characterization of several key parameters in the study of liposomal haemoglobins, including, for instance (1) the determination of the degree of haemoglobin entrapment by liposomes; (2) the poly(ethylene glycol) insertion efficiency; and (3) the evaluation of liposome-entrapped haemoglobins stability following storage at 4 °C, allowing to follow both the process of haemoglobin loss from liposomes and the liposome degradation. The procedure is proposed for the detection and characterization of liposome-entrapped haemoglobin formulations to control their misuse in sport, but is also suggested for further applications in biological and clinical laboratory investigations. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
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)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug Testing and AnalysisSame topicHemoglobin structure and functionFrench-language works237,207