MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145042086 · doi:10.3109/10837450.2014.882936

A new method for evaluating the dissolution of orodispersible films

2014· article· en· W2145042086 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmaceutical Development and Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicDrug Solubulity and Delivery Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsDissolutionMaterials scienceComputer scienceDosage formProcess engineeringDissolution testingChromatographyChemistryChemical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research was to develop and assess a new dissolution apparatus for orodispersible films (ODFs). The new apparatus was based on a flow-through cell design which requires only a limited amount of dissolution medium and can automatically collect samples in short-time intervals. Compared with the dissolution method in Chinese Pharmacopeia, our method simulated the flow condition of the oral cavity and resulted in reproducible dissolution data and remarkably discriminating capability. Therefore, we concluded that the proposed dissolution method was particularly suitable for evaluating the dissolution of ODFs and should also be applicable to other fast-dissolving solid dosage forms.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.316 · 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