MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087315490 · doi:10.1080/02652040500286086

Review and current status of emulsion/dispersion technology using an internal gelation process for the design of alginate particles

2006· review· en· W2087315490 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

VenueJournal of Microencapsulation · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicAdvanced Drug Delivery Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceNanotechnologyPolymerExtrusionDrug deliveryNanoparticleInertEmulsionEncapsulation (networking)MicrosphereChemical engineeringChemistryOrganic chemistryComputer scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emulsification/internal gelation has been suggested as an alternative to extrusion/external gelation in the encapsulation of several compounds including sensitive biologicals such as protein drugs. Protein-loaded microparticles offer an inert environment within the matrix and encapsulation is conducted at room temperature in a media free of organic solvents. Recently, the concept of internal gelation has been applied to formulating nanoparticles as drug delivery systems. Emulsification/internal gelation technologies available for microparticles preparation, particularly that involving alginate polymer, are described as well as recent advances towards applications in nanotechnology. Those methods show great promise as a tool for the development of encapsulation processes, especially for the new field of nanotechnology using natural polymers.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.298
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.232 · 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