MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096179647 · doi:10.1002/dta.2964

Two‐dimensional high performance liquid chromatography purification of underivatized urinary testosterone and metabolites for compound‐specific stable carbon isotope analysis

2020· article· en· W3096179647 on OpenAlexafffund
Karine Lalonde, Andrew Barber, Christiane Ayotte

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug Testing and Analysis · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersWorld Anti-Doping Agency
KeywordsChromatographyChemistryTestosterone (patch)Carbon fibersUrinary systemMaterials scienceMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Testosterone doping in sports is detected through the measurement of the carbon isotopic signature (δ 13 C) of testosterone and its metabolites in urine. A critical step in achieving accurate and precise δ 13 C values during compound‐specific stable carbon isotope analysis (CSIA) is the removal of interfering matrix components. To this end, the World Anti‐Doping Agency (WADA) recommends the use of high‐performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) as a method of sample pretreatment. We provide a description of an automated two‐dimensional HPLC (2D‐HPLC) purification method for urine extracts that has made possible the CSIA of underivatized steroids, requiring only 36 min per sample. Eight urinary steroids including testosterone (T) and dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and four of their metabolites as well as two endogenous reference compounds were collected during HPLC purification. Comparative GC chromatograms are used to contrast the efficiency of two‐dimensional (2D) purification to a previously established 1D‐HPLC method. The 2D purification leads to improved sample purity while simultaneously decreasing the analysis time, allowing for unprecedented sample throughput. Precision of δ 13 C for all analyzed compounds in negative and positive controls was 0.5‰ or better, which is comparable with the precision of pure reference materials at similar intensities.

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 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 score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrug Testing and AnalysisSame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207