Fabrication of a biodegradable calcium polyphosphate/polyvinyl‐urethane carbonate composite for high load bearing osteosynthesis applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The formation of biodegradable implants for use in osteosynthesis has been a major goal of biomaterials research for the past 2-3 decades. Self-reinforced polylactide systems represent the most significant success of this research to date, however, with elastic constants up to 12-15 GPa at best, they fail to provide the initial stiffness required of devices for stabilizing fractures of major load-bearing bones. Our research has investigated the use of calcium polyphosphate (CPP), an inorganic polymer in combination with polyvinyl-urethane carbonate (PVUC) organic polymers for such applications. Initial studies indicated that composite samples formed as interpenetrating phase composites (IPC) exhibited suitable as-made strength and stiffness, however, they displayed a rapid loss of properties when exposed to in vitro aging. An investigation to determine the mechanism of this accelerated in vitro degradation for the IPCs as well as to identify possible design changes to overcome this drawback was undertaken using a model IPC system. It was found that strong interfacial strength and minimal swelling of the PVUC are very important for obtaining and maintaining appropriate mechanical properties in vitro.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".