Trial reportJournal of clinical laboratory analysis1999
Measurement of total and diffusible serum fluoride.
Trial report in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Methodology developed for the simultaneous measurement of bone formation and bone resorption in rats based on the pharmacokinetics of fluoride.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article describes a technique for the measurement of total and diffusible F content of serum, at clinical significant concentrations of F (1-10 microM). The proposed procedure avoids the interference of unknown serum components with the ion-specific electrode. Sample F is concentrated fivefold through distillation of hydrofluoric acid (Taves' method). Ionic fluoride is presented to the electrode in a simple solution at concentrations within the linear response of the electrode. Average recoveries of F from serum or its ultrafiltrate were 96+/-7% (21%) and 97+/-12% (53%) (mean+/-SEM [CV]), respectively. With four replicates of each sample, the technique produce within-run standard deviations of 0.6 microM and 2.2 microM at 1 and 10 microM F, respectively. Total precision assessment gave standard deviations of 0.6 microM and 2.6 microM at 1 and 10 microM F, respectively. The fasting serum F levels of normal climacteric women, 45 to 65 years, showed an asymmetric distribution. The data obtained started at the detection limit of the technique (0.1 mM). The 75 percentile was 1.85 microM for total and 0.5 microM for diffusible F. In patients (n = 25) treated with NaF (30 mg F/day) the fasting levels of total serum F (4.5 +/-1.7 microM) did not differ from those of diffusible F (4.2+/-1.5 microM). In patients (n = 50) treated with sodium monofluorophosphate (15 mg F/day) the fasting levels of total and diffusible serum F were 6.5+/-1.7 microM and 0.5+/-0.03 microM, respectively. In conclusion, this paper establishes the presence of two fractions of serum fluorine: diffusible and nondiffusible (or protein bound) and describes a technique for their clinical estimation. In untreated subjects and in patients receiving NaF, the former fraction contains ionic fluoride. In patients treated with MFP, diffusible serum fluorine is composed by ionic fluoride and low molecular weight, peptide-bound, acid-labile fluorine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10414594PMC6807860W2086063921What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.