MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891517048 · doi:10.1089/jamp.2018.1476

Intranasal Filtration of Inhaled Aerosol in Human Subjects as a Function of Nasal Pressure Drop

2018· article· en· W2891517048 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNasal administrationAerosolDrop (telecommunication)MedicinePressure dropLung functionFiltration (mathematics)AnesthesiaChemistryImmunologyInternal medicineMechanicsMathematicsComputer sciencePhysicsLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Intersubject variability in nasal deposition of inhaled aerosol is significant because of the differences in nasal anatomy and breathing rate. The notable limitation of the majority of previously developed predictive correlations is including a limited number of subjects. A few recent studies have considered a wide age range of subjects, but the resulting correlations require the knowledge of the dimensions of the nasal airways and the properties of inhaled gas. In this study empirical correlations are proposed to predict aerosol deposition in nasal airways of subjects of different age as a function of intranasal pressure drop and the particle aerodynamic diameter. Methods: The experimental nasal deposition and pressure drop data in anatomically correct nasal replicas of 5 adults, 13 children aged 4–14 years, and 11 infants aged 3–18 months were reanalyzed. The range of aerodynamic diameter was 0.5–5.3 μm and physiological breathing at different activity levels was considered. Correlations between nasal deposition and a deposition parameter including the aerodynamic size of inhaled aerosol and nasal pressure drop were developed with nonlinear least-square algorithms. The general coefficient of determination r 2 was used to evaluate the fitting accuracy for each correlation. Results: New correlations were developed to predict the intranasal deposition of particles as a function of intranasal pressure drop and particle size for pediatric and adult subjects. The intranasal deposition fraction in adults and children can be calculated using the same correlation, whereas the intranasal deposition in infants followed a different trend line because of higher intranasal pressure drop in infants. Conclusion: This study was the first offering correlations to predict intranasal deposition in multiple age groups using only the aerodynamic size of inhaled aerosol and nasal pressure drop. These correlations include the effects of intersubject variability in nasal deposition within each age group and among different age groups.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.256 · 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