MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985093791 · doi:10.1021/bm800580c

Self-Cross-Linking Polyelectrolyte Complexes for Therapeutic Cell Encapsulation

2008· article· en· W1985093791 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad A. Jafar Mazumder, Feng Shen, Nicholas A. D. Burke, Murray Potter, Harald D. H. Stöver

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomacromolecules · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersDivision of Chemistry
KeywordsPolyelectrolyteMethacrylatePolymer chemistryChemistryCell encapsulationCalciumChemical engineeringChitosanEthylene glycolCalcium alginateRadical polymerizationIonic strengthPolymerizationPolymerBiophysicsSelf-healing hydrogelsOrganic chemistryAqueous solution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-cross-linking polyelectrolytes are used to strengthen the surface of calcium alginate beads for cell encapsulation. Poly([2-(methacryloyloxy)ethyl]trimethylammonium chloride), containing 30 mol % 2-aminoethyl methacrylate, and poly(sodium methacrylate), containing 30 mol % 2-(methacryloyloxy)ethyl acetoacetate, were prepared by radical polymerization. Sequential deposition of these polyelectrolytes on calcium alginate films or beads led to a shell consisting of a covalently cross-linked polyelectrolyte complex that resisted osmotic pressure changes as well as challenges with citrate and high ionic strength. Confocal laser fluorescence microscopy revealed that both polyelectrolytes were concentrated in the outer 7-25 microm of the calcium alginate beads. The thickness of this cross-linked shell increased with exposure time. GPC studies of solutions permeating through analogous flat model membranes showed molecular weight cut-offs between 150 and 200 kg/mol for poly(ethylene glycol), suitable for cell encapsulation. C 2C 12 mouse cells were shown to be viable within calcium alginate capsules coated with the new polyelectrolytes, even though some of the capsules showed fibroid overcoats when implanted in mice due to an immune response.

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)0.000
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations36
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomacromoleculesSame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207