Thermoreversible Gel Formulation Containing Sodium Lauryl Sulfate as a Potential Contraceptive Device
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The contraceptive properties of a gel formulation containing sodium lauryl sulfate were investigated in both in vitro and in vivo models. Results showed that sodium lauryl sulfate inhibited, in a concentration-dependent manner, the activity of sheep testicular hyaluronidase. Sodium lauryl sulfate also completely inhibited human sperm motility as evaluated by the 30-sec Sander-Cramer test. The acid-buffering capacity of gel formulations containing sodium lauryl sulfate increased with the molarity of the citrate buffers used for their preparations. Furthermore, experiments in which semen was mixed with undiluted gel formulations in different proportions confirmed their physiologically relevant buffering capacity. Intravaginal application of the gel formulation containing sodium lauryl sulfate to rabbits before their artificial insemination with freshly ejaculated semen completely prevented egg fertilization. The gel formulation containing sodium lauryl sulfate was fully compatible with nonlubricated latex condoms. Taken together, these results suggest that the gel formulation containing sodium lauryl sulfate could represent a potential candidate for use as a topical vaginal spermicidal formulation to provide fertility control in women.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".