MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048623202 · doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics6020249

Drug-Eluting Nasal Implants: Formulation, Characterization, Clinical Applications and Challenges

2014· article· en· W2048623202 on OpenAlexaff
Ankit Parikh, Utkarshini Anand, Malachy C. Ugwu, Tiam Feridooni, Emad Massoud, Remigius U. Agu

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceutics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicAdvanced Drug Delivery Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreCapital District Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSinusitisChronic rhinosinusitisIntensive care medicineImplantChronic sinusitisDrugSurgeryPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic inflammation and infection of the nasal sinuses, also referred to as Chronic Rhinosinusitis (CRS), severely affects patients' quality of life. Adhesions, ostial stenosis, infection and inflammation relapses complicate chronic sinusitis treatment strategies. Drug-eluting stents, packings or implants have been suggested as reasonable alternatives for addressing these concerns. This article reviewed potential drug candidates for nasal implants, formulation methods/optimization and characterization methods. Clinical applications and important considerations were also addressed. Clinically-approved implants (Propel™ implant, the Relieva stratus™ MicroFlow spacer, and the Sinu-Foam™ spacer) for CRS treatment was an important focus. The advantages and limitations, as well as future considerations, challenges and the need for additional research in the field of nasal drug implant development, were discussed.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.215
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations49
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmaceuticsSame topicAdvanced Drug Delivery SystemsFrench-language works237,207