MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984704995 · doi:10.1093/chromsci/bmz069

A Sensitive and Quantitative Isotope-Dilution LC-MS/MS Method for Analysis of Hydrazine in Tobacco Smoke

2019· article· en· W2984704995 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mehran Sharifi, Carmen Donisa, Peter Joza

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chromatographic Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryChromatographyIsotope dilutionDilutionTobacco smokeQuantitative analysis (chemistry)Hydrazine (antidepressant)Mass spectrometryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new isotope dilution liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometric method was developed for the analysis of potential hydrazine present in tobacco smoke. The sample preparation was performed via an optimized derivatization method using an aqueous buffer:methanol solution of 2-nitrobenzaldehyde (10 g/L) used as a derivatizing agent. The mainstream smoke of cigarettes was passed through a glass fiber filter pad followed by a trapping solution containing an isotopically labeled 15N2-hydrazine used as internal standard. After smoking, the filter pad was extracted with the trapping solution and then incubated for 30 minutes at 35°C. An aliquot of the extract was centrifuged and the resultant hydrazone was quantified by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). The isotope dilution standard calibration curve demonstrated good linearity (R2 > 0.999) from 0.079 to 248 ng/mL, with limits of quantification in mainstream smoke of 0.2 and 0.4 ng/cig for ISO and Canadian Intense smoking regimens, respectively. The method recovery was assessed using samples spiked with solutions of known amounts of hydrazine. The results showed good accuracy with recoveries ranging from 98 to 111%. Although there were no detectable levels of hydrazine in the reference cigarettes used in the validation (KR3R4F), the method precision was estimated to be ~10% based on the variability observed in the spiked samples. Trapping efficiencies were assessed using a hydrazine permeation tube providing a known amount of hydrazine vapor such that the distribution between the vapor phase and particulate phase of mainstream smoke could be determined.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chromatographic ScienceSame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207