MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620812112 · doi:10.1093/annweh/wxx023

Use of the Novel Derivatizing Agent 1,8-Diaminonapthalene With the CIP10 Sampler to Measure 4,4’-Methylene Diphenyl Diisocyanate Atmospheres

2017· article· en· W2620812112 on OpenAlexafffund
Silvia Puscasu, Simon Aubin, Philippe Sarazin, Lucile Richard, Mark W Spence, Sébastien Gagné

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Work Exposures and Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational exposure and asthma
Canadian institutionsInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail
FundersInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsIsocyanatePolyurethaneChromatographyChemistryMethyleneNuclear chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DAN is a novel derivatizing agent for isocyanate sampling which targets total reactive isocyanate group (TRIG). Field evaluations have been conducted for 4,4'-Methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) sampling using DAN as the derivatizing agent in a CIP10. The perimidone formed, selective of TRIG, was analyzed in laboratory by liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry. Workplaces using MDI-based polyurethane spray foam and MDI wood product binder were studied. Each study compared the data obtained between the CIP10/DAN, the CIP10/MP, and a reference method. As a first evaluation, the CIP10/DAN sampled simulated MDI spray foam atmosphere in parallel with impingers (reference method) and CIP10/MP. The mean of the TRIG concentration values measured was 16% (95% confidence interval [CI], [1, 31]) higher for the CIP10/MP samples as compared to the impinger samples, while the mean TRIG concentrations found were 98% (95% CI [63, 133]) higher for the CIP10/DAN samples as compared to the impinger samples. For sampling done in a real workplace using MDI-based spray foam, the CIP10/DAN method showed lower results than the CIP10/MP method. The presence of hygroscopic DMSO used in the DAN approach is a limitation and may prevent obtaining accurate results in the spray foam atmosphere. CIP10/DAN was also studied in MDI wood product binder atmosphere. Mean TRIG concentrations found were 80% (95% CI [51, 110]) and 79% (95% CI [50, 108]) lower for the CIP10/MP and CIP10/DAN method, respectively, as compared to the reference method (a 13-mm filter coated with MP). In this case, the CIP10 may have reached its limit in this last evaluation where vapors and particles below 1 µm were not collected as efficiently as they were with the reference method.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.232
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.139 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Work Exposures and HealthSame topicOccupational exposure and asthmaFrench-language works237,207