ArticleAAPS PharmSciTech2013
Good Cascade Impactor Practice (GCIP) and considerations for "in-use" specifications.
Article in AAPS PharmSciTech, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating 3D-Printed Pre-separator Inserts in a Fast Screening Impactor for Physicochemical Characterization of Fine Particle Dose Release from Dry Powder Inhalers.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2025Article
- In Vitro Analysis of Aerodynamic Properties and Co-Deposition of a Fixed-Dose Combination of Fluticasone Furoate, Umeclidinium Bromide, and Vilanterol Trifenatate.Pharmaceutics · 2024Article
- Nanoparticle Delivery Platforms for RNAi Therapeutics Targeting COVID-19 Disease in the Respiratory Tract.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Droplet Size and Distribution of Nebulized 3% Sodium Chloride, Albuterol, and Epoprostenol by Phase Doppler Particle Analyzer.Current therapeutic research, clinical and experimental · 2021Article
- Particle sizing of pharmaceutical aerosols via direct imaging of particle settling velocities.European journal of pharmaceutical sciences : official journal of the European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2018Article
- Multivariate Analysis of Effects of Asthmatic Patient Respiratory Profiles on the In Vitro Performance of a Reservoir Multidose and a Capsule-Based Dry Powder Inhaler.Pharmaceutical research · 2016Article
- Aerosol Delivery of siRNA to the Lungs. Part 1: Rationale for Gene Delivery Systems.Kona : powder science and technology in Japan · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The multi-stage cascade impactor (CI) is widely used to determine aerodynamic particle size distributions (APSDs) of orally inhaled products. Its size-fractionating capability depends primarily on the size of nozzles of each stage. Good Cascade Impactor Practice (GCIP) requires that these critical dimensions are linked to the accuracy of the APSD measurement based on the aerodynamic diameter size scale. Effective diameter (Deff) is the critical dimension describing any nozzle array, as it is directly related to stage cut-point size (d50). d50 can in turn be determined by calibration using particles of known aerodynamic diameter, providing traceability to the international length standard. Movements in Deff within manufacturer tolerances for compendial CIs result in the worst case in shifts in d50 of <±10%. Stage mensuration therefore provides satisfactory control of measurement accuracy. The accurate relationship of Deff to d50 requires the CI system to be leak-free, which can be checked by sealing the apparatus at the entry to the induction port and isolating it from the vacuum source and measuring the rate of pressure rise before each use. Mensuration takes place on an infrequent basis compared with the typical interval between individual APSD determinations. Measurement of stage flow resistance (pressure drop; ΔPstage) could enable the user to know that the CI stages are fit for use before every APSD measurement, by yielding an accurate measure of Deff. However, more data are needed to assess the effects of wear and blockage before this approach can be advocated as part of GCIP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.