Clinical Toxicologic Implications of Ethylene Glycol and Glycolic Acid Poisoning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metabolic pathways have been elucidated for various chemical and solvent exposures in humans. Clinical laboratory analyses in most chemical and solvent exposures are directed toward identification and quantitation of unchanged substance in serum or whole blood. For example, most laboratories routinely screen for unchanged ethylene glycol in suspected poisonings and quantitate ethylene glycol in positive cases even though toxicity from ethylene glycol exposure (including central nervous system depression, acute renal failure, and elevated anion gap metabolic acidosis) is primarily caused by one metabolite-glycolic acid. One objective of this manuscript is to describe the authors' clinical experience with glycolic acid analysis in ethylene glycol human poisonings. Recommended clinical laboratory tests for small hospitals and toxicology reference laboratories are presented to rule out or confirm ethylene glycol exposure. Another concern with laboratory support in ethylene glycol poisoning is correct identification of ethylene glycol because analysis of this substance is often problematic. In one case laboratories incorrectly identified an organic acid from an inherited metabolic disease as ethylene glycol, and in another case the intentional ethylene glycol poisoning of an infant was determined to be the results of an endogenous organic acid. The most robust analytical methods for determining ethylene glycol and glycolic acid are chromatographic methods. Ideally, screening methods for ethylene glycol should be confirmed by another method based on a different principle of analysis or include simultaneous metabolite analysis (glycolic acid). In centers where several ethylene glycol cases present annually, toxicology laboratories supporting these centers should incorporate glycolic acid monitoring in their ethylene glycol screening programs and include analysis of both ethylene glycol and glycolic acid during treatment (hemodialysis) in all confirmed poisonings. Measurement of glycolic acid provides important diagnostic and prognostic information that one cannot correlate with the amount of ethylene glycol in serum or whole blood.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".