MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045522408 · doi:10.1097/icl.0b013e3181b26c49

Uptake and Release of Dexamethasone Phosphate From Silicone Hydrogel and Group I, II, and IV Hydrogel Contact Lenses

2009· article· en· W2045522408 on OpenAlexaff
Adrienne N. Boone, Alex Hui, Lyndon Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueEye & Contact Lens Science & Clinical Practice · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilicone hydrogelDexamethasoneContact lensLens (geology)Self-healing hydrogelsDrugSiliconeDrug deliveryChemistryMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringPharmacologyMedicineOphthalmologyOpticsNanotechnologyInternal medicinePolymer chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the uptake and release kinetics of the synthetic glucocorticoid anti-inflammatory drug dexamethasone into various conventional and silicone hydrogel contact lens materials. METHODS: Three conventional and six silicone hydrogel lenses were used in this study. A 0.1% dexamethasone solution was formulated and used to dope the various contact lens materials. The uptake and release of the drug was measured using a UV-visible light spectrophotometer at various time points during a period of 24 hr for each phase. RESULTS: Statistical analysis showed that all lenses took up a significant amount of dexamethasone. Alphafilcon A and lotrafilcon A showed the greatest uptake of dexamethasone, at 118 +/- 10 microg/lens and 102 +/- 11 microg/lens, respectively, and galyfilcon took up the least amount of drug at 34 +/- 6 microg/lens. The release of the drug from the lens materials was also statistically significant. The majority of the lenses released between 20 and 30 microg/lens, except for alphafilcon A and lotrafilcon A, which released a statistically different amount of drug when compared with the other lens materials. Alphafilcon A released 65 +/- 1.3 microg/lens, whereas lotrafilcon A slowly released only 11 +/- 0.2 microg/lens. CONCLUSIONS: Although most of the lenses released enough drug to have anti-inflammatory action, none of the materials released drug for a long enough period of time to be clinically useful as a drug delivery device.

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 score0.003

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations80
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEye & Contact Lens Science & Clinical PracticeSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207