MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969775034 · doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.05.052

Determination of albumin sorption to intraocular lenses by radiolabeling and confocal laser scanning microscopy

2009· article· en· W1969775034 on OpenAlexaffabout
Doerte Luensmann, Miriam Heynen, Lina Liu, Heather Sheardown, Lyndon Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraocular Surgery and Lenses
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSiliconeBovine serum albuminConfocalIntraocular lensPenetration (warfare)Confocal microscopyMaterials scienceAcrylic resinChromatographyMethacrylateBiomedical engineeringChemistryOphthalmologyOpticsMedicineNanotechnologyPolymerComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine albumin adsorption profiles and penetration depth of 3 intraocular lens (IOL) materials over time using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) and radiolabeling. SETTING: Centre for Contact Lens Research, School of Optometry, and Department of Biology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA), silicone, and foldable hydrophilic acrylic IOLs were incubated in 0.5 mg/mL bovine serum albumin (BSA) for 1, 7, and 14 days. The BSA was conjugated with lucifer yellow VS to allow identification of the protein location by fluorescent imaging with CLSM. Next, the protein uptake was quantified using 2% (125)I-labeled BSA. RESULTS: Confocal laser scanning microscopy showed increasing BSA uptake for silicone and PMMA IOLs after 14 days of incubation (P<.05), with an apparent penetration depth of 8.7 microm +/- 1.9 (SD) and 9.2 +/- 1.4 microm, respectively. For hydrophilic acrylic IOLs, BSA was detected at a depth of 38 +/- 7.4 microm after 1 day, followed by an increase to 192.7 +/- 16.2 microm after 14 days. Despite the penetration depth into the hydrophilic acrylic IOLs, quantitative results confirmed that PMMA and hydrophilic acrylic deposited significantly less BSA (mean 278.3 +/- 41.7 ng and 296.5 +/- 33.1 ng, respectively) than silicone IOLs (mean 392.6 +/- 37.6 ng) (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Silicone and PMMA IOL materials showed BSA sorption near the lens surface only, while BSA penetrated deep into the hydrophilic acrylic IOL matrix. Combining the qualitative CLSM method and quantitative radiolabeling technique provided detailed information on protein interactions with implantable biomaterials.

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)0.001
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 score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cataract & Refractive SurgerySame topicIntraocular Surgery and LensesFrench-language works237,207