MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988741595 · doi:10.1021/nn503719n

Shear-Thinning Nanocomposite Hydrogels for the Treatment of Hemorrhage

2014· article· en· W1988741595 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Akhilesh K. Gaharwar, Reginald K. Avery, Alexander Assmann, Arghya Paul, Gareth H. McKinley, Ali Khademhosseini, Bradley D. Olsen

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Nano · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemostasis and retained surgical items
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBrookhaven National LaboratoryArmy Research OfficeHealth CanadaU.S. Public Health ServiceNational Institutes of HealthFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNational Institute of General Medical SciencesDeutsche Herzstiftung
KeywordsHemostasisSelf-healing hydrogelsHemostatMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringFibrinNanocompositeGelatinShear thinningBiocompatible materialNanotechnologyComposite materialSurgeryMedicineChemistryRheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Internal hemorrhaging is a leading cause of death after traumatic injury on the battlefield. Although several surgical approaches such as the use of fibrin glue and tissue adhesive have been commercialized to achieve hemostasis, these approaches are difficult to employ on the battlefield and cannot be used for incompressible wounds. Here, we present shear-thinning nanocomposite hydrogels composed of synthetic silicate nanoplatelets and gelatin as injectable hemostatic agents. These materials are demonstrated to decrease in vitro blood clotting times by 77%, and to form stable clot-gel systems. In vivo tests indicated that the nanocomposites are biocompatible and capable of promoting hemostasis in an otherwise lethal liver laceration. The combination of injectability, rapid mechanical recovery, physiological stability, and the ability to promote coagulation result in a hemostat for treating incompressible wounds in out-of-hospital, emergency conditions.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 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

Citations399
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS NanoSame topicHemostasis and retained surgical itemsFrench-language works237,207