Relationship between Plasma Zinc and Red Blood Cell Zinc Levels in Hospitalized Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patient zinc stores are quantified with plasma or red blood cell (RBC) measures. The relationship between these 2 measures of zinc status has not been determined in a broad population of hospitalized patients. METHODS: Both plasma zinc and RBC zinc were prospectively collected and measured in 252 consenting patients admitted urgently to hospital. Plasma and RBC zinc levels were measured within 48 h of admission. We collected demographic, vitals, and laboratory data for use in multivariate regression models that included markers of acute disease severity and systemic inflammation. RESULTS: Plasma zinc and RBC zinc levels were low in 63% and 10% of hospitalized patients, respectively. Categorized zinc levels based on normal intervals for plasma and RBC zinc values were not related (χ2 0.47 [2 df] P = 0.79). The Pearson correlation coefficient between plasma zinc and RBC zinc was -0.09 (P = 0.15). After adjustments for multiple clinical covariates, the correlation coefficient remained insignificant (r = -0.11, P = 0.08). Plasma zinc was inversely associated with markers of inflammation including the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and temperature. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-specific plasma and RBC zinc are unrelated in hospitalized patients, possibly due to decreased values with acute illness seen in the former but not the latter. Future studies are required to determine which of these measures best predicts outcomes in hospitalized patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".