MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020552621 · doi:10.1080/15569520500371784

The Effects of Tween 20 on<i>in vitro</i>Bovine Lenses

2005· article· en· W2020552621 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa Lagrou, Mandy Lalonde, Kelley L. Moran, J. G. Sivak, Vladimir Bantseev

Bibliographic record

VenueCutaneous and Ocular Toxicology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLens (geology)Positive controlNegative controlChemistrySkin irritationPulmonary surfactantIrritationChromatographyOphthalmologyMedicineOpticsTraditional medicineImmunologyDermatologyBiochemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The optical properties of the cultured bovine lens were analyzed after exposure to various concentrations of Tween 20, a nonionic surfactant, to find a nonirritating concentration for commercial products. Bovine lenses were extracted and placed into a culture chamber for 24 hours at 37°C with 4–5% CO2. The lenses were placed into three treatment (1%, n = 10; 10%, n = 9; and 100%, n = 10 Tween 20) and one control group (n = 7) for 15 minutes. For 8 days following treatment, the lens optics were analyzed periodically for back vertex distance (focal length) and back vertex distance variability (sharpness of focus) using a laser-scanning device. For both the control and the 1% Tween 20 condition, no significant change was seen from the beginning of the experiment (p > 0.05). The 10% Tween 20 solution induced significant loss of sharp focus (0.62 ± 0.1 mm SEM) 4 hours after exposure, increasing to BVD = 1.69 ± 0.3 mm SEM by the end of experimentation (p < 0.05). At full strength (100%), Tween 20 began to cause damage after 4 hours (BVD = 0.50 ± 0.06 mm SEM), and this change increased to BVD = 4.46 ± 0.59 mm SEM after 8 days following treatment (p < 0.05). Therefore, a dose-dependant increase in back vertex distance (BVD) variability was detected. This research suggests that using 1% Tween 20 in commercial solutions should not produce ocular irritation, whereas concentrations above 10% will cause significant irritation. As well, the bovine lens assay, paired with the automated lens scanner, provided a sensitive approach to measure mild ocular irritation.

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 score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCutaneous and Ocular ToxicologySame topicAnimal testing and alternativesFrench-language works237,207