MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of hydrophilicity of carbon nanotube arrays on the release rate and activity of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2

2011· article· en· W1540086577 on OpenAlexaff
Zhaojun Han, Kostya Ostrikov, Cher Ming Tan, Beng Kang Tay, Sean Peel

Bibliographic record

VenueNanotechnology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperhydrophilicityCarbon nanotubeMaterials scienceBone morphogenetic protein 2NanotechnologyNanotubePoloxamerRecombinant DNAChemical engineeringDiffusionBone morphogenetic proteinDrug deliveryChemistryPolymerContact angleComposite materialBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Novel nanostructures such as vertically aligned carbon nanotube (CNT) arrays have received increasing interest as drug delivery carriers. In the present study, two CNT arrays with extreme surface wettabilities are fabricated and their effects on the release of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) are investigated. It is found that the superhydrophilic arrays retained a larger amount of rhBMP-2 than the superhydrophobic ones. Further use of a poloxamer diffusion layer delayed the initial burst and resulted in a greater total amount of rhBMP-2 released from both surfaces. In addition, rhBMP-2 bound to the superhydrophilic CNT arrays remained bioactive while they denatured on the superhydrophobic surfaces. These results are related to the combined effects of rhBMP-2 molecules interacting with poloxamer and the surface, which could be essential in the development of advanced carriers with tailored surface functionalities.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanotechnologySame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207