MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140050568 · doi:10.1155/2014/434067

Antiulcerogenic Potential Activity of Free and Nanoencapsulated<i>Passiflora serratodigitata</i>L. Extracts

2014· article· en· W2140050568 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Strasser, Peky Noriega, Raimar Löbenberg, Nádia Araci Bou‐Chacra, Elfriede Marianne Bacchi

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMed Research International · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedicinal Plant Extracts Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsPassifloraFlavonoidChemistryHomogeneousDrug deliveryFraction (chemistry)SolubilityTraditional medicineNanocapsulesChromatographyNanoparticleNanotechnologyBotanyOrganic chemistryMaterials scienceMedicineAntioxidantBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides evidence that the leaves and stem of Passiflora serratodigitata L. dry crude extract (DCE), ethylacetate fraction (EAF), and residual water fraction show potential antiulcerogenic activity. Interestingly, the polymeric nanocapsule loaded with EAF had 10-fold more activity than the free EAF. Furthermore, the polymer nanoparticles provided homogeneous colloidal drug delivery systems and allowed overcoming challenges such as poor aqueous solubility as well as the physical-chemical instability of the organic extract, which presented 90% (w/w) of the flavonoid content. The entrapment efficiency of the total flavonoid was 90.6 ± 2.5% (w/v) for the DCE and 79.9 ± 2.7% (w/v) for the EAF. This study shows that nanoencapsulation improves both the physicochemical properties and the efficacy of the herbal formulations. Therefore, free and encapsulated extracts have the potential to be suitable drug design candidates for the therapeutic management of ulcer.

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 score0.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioMed Research InternationalSame topicMedicinal Plant Extracts EffectsFrench-language works237,207