Comparison of Blood Microsampling with DBS and Conventional Blood Collection Techniques Used in A Midazolam Biostudy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Quantitative DBS LC-MS/MS assay for midazolam was used to compare two sample collection techniques (venipuncture and finger prick) and the midazolam concentrations measured in plasma samples, DBS and dried plasma spots. METHODOLOGY: Midazolam was extracted from DBS cards and compared with whole blood collected from usual venipuncture. Dried plasma spots were also compared with plasma. The blood volume used as well as the temperature impact during the blood and plasma deposits was evaluated. Midazolam was administrated to six healthy subjects during a clinical trial to obtained blood and plasma samples for the statistical comparison. CONCLUSION: The method for midazolam using DBS was validated and showed an excellent performance. Excellent correlations were observed when the same collection procedures were used.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it