MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034530672 · doi:10.1021/bm050731x

In Vivo Degradation Behavior of Photo-Cross-Linked <i>star</i>-Poly(ε-caprolactone-<i>c</i><i>o</i>-<scp>d</scp>,<scp>l</scp>-lactide) Elastomers

2005· article· en· W2034530672 on OpenAlexaff
Brian G. Amsden, M. Yat Tse, Norma Turner, Darryl K. Knight, Stephen C. Pang

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomacromolecules · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElastomerIn vivoDegradation (telecommunications)ModulusMaterials scienceCaprolactoneYoung's modulusPolymer chemistryComposite materialChemistryPolymerizationPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have recently reported on the preparation of biodegradable elastomers through photo-cross-linking acrylated star-poly(epsilon-caprolactone-co-D,L-lactide). In this paper we assess the change in their physical properties during in vivo degradation in rats after subcutaneous implantation over a 12 week period. These parameter changes were compared to those observed in vitro. Two different cross-link densities were examined, representing the range from a high Young's modulus to a low Young modulus. Elastomers having a high cross-link density exhibited degradation behavior consistent with a surface erosion mechanism, and degraded at the same rate in vivo as observed in vitro. Young's modulus and the stress at break of these elastomers decreased linearly with the degradation time, while the strain at break decreased slowly. Elastomers having a low cross-link density exhibited a degradation mechanism consistent with bulk erosion. Young's modulus and the stress at break of these elastomers decreased slowly initially, followed by a marked increase in mechanical strength loss after 4 weeks. The elastomers were well tolerated by the rats over the 12 week period in vivo.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.274
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations64
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomacromoleculesSame topicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207