External contamination of commercial containers by antineoplastic agents: a literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to review the literature regarding the external contamination of commercial vials by antineoplastic drugs. A PubMed and CINAHL searches from 1 January 1990 to 1 May 2018 was performed with the terms: « antineoplastic agents », « environmental monitoring », « drug packaging », « vials » and « contamination ». Articles that presented results on the external contamination of commercial vials were included. Twenty-four articles were identified from 11 countries. A total of 4248 vials were sampled from 28 manufacturers. Traces were found on 56% (2379/4248) of vials. A maximum of 150 000 ng was measured on a glass vial of fluorouracil. This literature review showed that the exterior of the majority of commercial antineoplastic vials was contaminated. Manufacturers should limit this contamination. Centres are also encouraged to clean the vials on receipt. Personal protection equipment should be worn at all steps of the drug-use process.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".