MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026529311 · doi:10.1093/jaoacint/qsaa069

Determination of Curcuminoids in Turmeric Dietary Supplements by HPLC-DAD: Multi-laboratory Study Through the NIH-ODS/NIST Quality Assurance Program

2020· article· en· W3026529311 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of AOAC International · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCurcumin's Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
FundersOffice of Dietary Supplements
KeywordsNISTQuality assuranceDietary supplementChromatographyFood scienceChemistryMedicineComputer scienceNatural language processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Turmeric is a medicinal herb containing curcuminoids, used as quality markers in dietary supplements. In 2016, an AOAC First Action Official MethodSM was adopted for quantitation of curcuminoids and requires multi-laboratory reproducibility data for Final Action status. OBJECTIVE: To collect reproducibility data for the quantitation of curcuminoids in dietary supplements through the National Institutes of Health Office of Dietary Supplements/National Institute of Standards and Technology Quality Assurance Program (QAP). METHOD: Laboratories that participated in the QAP by following the Official Methods of AnalysisSM Method 2016.16, submitted data for ten turmeric products. The data were analyzed for mean, repeatability, and reproducibility standard deviations, repeatability, and reproducibility. RESULTS: The initial data collection resulted in insufficient replicates (five) for each test sample to determine reproducibility, therefore laboratories were provided additional materials resulting in an incremental data approach. For homogenous products, reproducibility for curcumin ranged from 3.4 to 10.3%, bisdemethoxycurcumin with reproducibility ranging from 6.4 to 14.8%, and demethoxycurcumin ranging from 5.6 to 9.9%. The method was unsuitable for the quantitation of curcuminoids in complex smoothie products, products containing microbeads, or tinctures based on interlaboratory variances. Recommendations were provided for future multi-laboratory studies performed through QAPs and incremental approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Method 2016.16 is suitable for the quantitation of curcuminoids and should be adopted for Final Action status for single and multi-ingredient dietary supplements containing dried roots, dried powders/extracts in bulk material, capsules, and softgels. HIGHLIGHTS: Reproducibility for Method 2016.16 was collected through a non-traditional incremental data multi-laboratory study. The method is suitable for quantitation of curcuminoids in most common dietary supplements.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.349 · 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