MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1979049585 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/57/19/6295

A framework for modeling ocular drug transport and flow through the eye using micro-CT

2012· article· en· W1979049585 on OpenAlexafffund
Corey A. Smith, Tim Newson, Kevin C. Leonard, Joseph Barfett, David W. Holdsworth, Cindy Hutnik, Kathleen A. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Center for Atmospheric Research
KeywordsBiomedical engineeringMaterials scienceDiffusionSagittal planeCoronal planeNuclear medicineChemistryMedicinePhysicsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study uses micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) imaging for assessment of concentration and transport mechanisms of ocular drug surrogates following intravitreal injection. Injections of an iodinated contrast agent were administered to enucleated porcine eyes prior to scanning over 192 min. Image analysis was performed using signal profiles and regions of interest that corresponded to specific iodine concentrations. Diffusion coefficients of the injected iodine solutions were calculated using nonlinear regression analysis with a diffusion model. There was a predominantly diffusive component in the movement of the contrast to the back of the eye in the horizontal (sagittal & coronal) directions, with ultimate retinal fate observed after 120 min. The diffusion coefficients were found to have a mean of 4.87 × 10(-4) mm(2) s(-1) and standard deviation of 8.39 × 10(-5) mm(2) s(-1) for 150 mg ml(-1) iodine concentration and 6.13 × 10(-4) ± 1.83 × 10(-4) mm(2) s(-1) for 37.5 mg ml(-1) concentration. However, it should be noted that these coefficients were time dependent and were found to decay as the diffusion front interacted with the retinal wall. A real-time, accurate, non-invasive method of tracking a bolus and its concentration is achieved using a high spatial resolution and fast scanning speed micro-CT system.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and Biology→Same topicRetinal Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→