Bibliographic record
Abstract
This aim of this study was to survey the rate of accelerated degradation of coated and uncoated aspirin tablets stored in pill organizers (POs). POs are multi-compartment boxes that patients commonly use to sort pills, especially if the medication regime is complex. The use of POs involves removing the pill from its original package and placing it in the compartment for extended periods of time. Although an effective sorting tool, POs might allow accelerated degradation of the drug since medications are subjected to more light, humidity and temperature. Degradation of medications entails many health hazards and concerns, hence the importance of assessing the rate of formation of degradation by products. A 31-compartment PO, which is commonly used at local retirement houses, was investigated. It is typically placed in a drug cabinet inside a bathroom. Aspirin degrades by hydrolysis to form salicylic acid, which causes stomach irritation. pH titration of aspirin tablets in PO and in original packaging was used to qualitatively establish that aspirin undergoes accelerated degradation in POs placed in bathroom drug cabinets. The percentage of free salicylic acid in coated and uncoated aspirin tablets was measured using high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). %SA in uncoated tablets reached 1.503%, which is five times above the USP limit of 0.30%. Uncoated tablets reach the maximum limit after 18 days of storage in PO. Coated tablets remained within the prescribed USP limit of 3.0%. The findings of the study established that storing aspirin pills in POs for extended periods of time is an inappropriate practice as it accelerates the rate at which tablets undergo hydrolysis degradation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".