MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057669136 · doi:10.1080/02713680600888799

Kinetics of<i>In Vitro</i>Lysozyme Deposition on Silicone Hydrogel, PMMA, and FDA Groups I, II, and IV Contact Lens Materials

2006· article· en· W2057669136 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Eye Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLysozymeKineticsDeposition (geology)Polymethyl methacrylateIn vitroMethacrylateContact lensSiliconeChemistrySilicone hydrogelLens (geology)Polymer chemistryBiophysicsMaterials scienceBiochemistryOphthalmologyPolymerizationOrganic chemistryBiologyPolymerMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We sought to compare the kinetics of in vitro lysozyme deposition on silicone hydrogel (SH), polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), and FDA groups I, II, and IV contact lenses. Lenses were incubated in 125I-labeled lysozyme for time periods ranging from 1 hr to 28 days, and radioactive counts were determined. SH lenses and PMMA deposited less lysozyme than conventional hydrogel lenses (p < 0.05). Lysozyme accumulation on group IV lenses reached a maximum on the seventh day and then plateaued, whereas on groups I, II, and SH lenses, deposition continued to increase across all time periods, reiterating that kinetics of lysozyme deposition is highly material dependent.

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.

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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.593

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.301 · 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