Triple Quadrupole Versus High Resolution Quadrupole-Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry for Quantitative LC-MS/MS Analysis of 25-Hydroxyvitamin D in Human Serum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe a systematic comparison of high and low resolution LC-MS/MS assays for quantification of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 in human serum. Identical sample preparation, chromatography separations, electrospray ionization sources, precursor ion selection, and ion activation were used; the two assays differed only in the implemented final mass analyzer stage; viz. high resolution quadrupole-quadrupole-time-of-flight (QqTOF) versus low resolution triple quadrupole instruments. The results were assessed against measured concentration levels from a routine clinical chemiluminescence immunoassay. Isobaric interferences prevented the simple use of TOF-MS spectra for extraction of accurate masses and necessitated the application of collision-induced dissociation on the QqTOF platform. The two mass spectrometry assays provided very similar analytical figures of merit, reflecting the lack of relevant isobaric interferences in the MS/MS domain, and were successfully applied to determine the levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D for patients with chronic liver disease. Graphical Abstract ᅟ.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".