MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112469272 · doi:10.1002/jbm.b.33521

Investigating the effect of <scp>T</scp>i<scp>O</scp><sub>2</sub> on the structure and biocompatibility of bioactive glass

2015· article· en· W2112469272 on OpenAlexaff
Lana M. Placek, Timothy J. Keenan, Yiming Li, Chokchai Yatongchai, D. Pradhan, Daniel Boyd, Nathan P. Mellott, Anthony W. Wren

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B Applied Biomaterials · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagic angle spinningSolubilityBiocompatibilityBioactive glassNuclear chemistryX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyGlass transitionTitaniumNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyMaterials scienceSpectroscopyMagic angleChemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Chemical engineeringStereochemistryComposite materialPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryMetallurgyPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Titanium (Ti4+) containing materials have been widely used in medical applications due to its associated bioactivity in vivo. This study investigates the replacement of Si4+ with Ti4+ within the system SiO2‐Na2O‐CaO‐P2O5 to determine its influence on glass structure. This strategy was conducted in order to control the glass solubility to further improve the cellular response. Ti4+ incorporation was found to have little influence on the glass transition temperature (Tg = 520 ± 8°C) and magic angle spinning‐nuclear magnetic resonance (MAS‐NMR) shifts (−80 ppm) up to additions of 18 wt %. However, at 30 wt % the Tg increased to 600°C and MAS‐NMR spectra shifted to −88 ppm. There was also an associated reduction in glass solubility as a function of Ti4+ incorporation as determined by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy where Si4+ (1649–44 mg/L) and Na+ (892–36 mg/L) levels greatly reduced while Ca2+ (3–5 mg/L) and (2–7 mg/L) levels remained relatively unchanged. MC3T3 osteoblasts were used for cell culture testing and it was determined that the Ti4+ glasses increased cell viability and also facilitated greater osteoblast adhesion and proliferation to the glass surface compared to the control glass. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 104B: 1703–1712, 2016.

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B Applied BiomaterialsSame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207