Mechanisms of in Vivo Degradation and Resorption of Calcium Phosphate Based Biomaterials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Calcium phosphate ceramic materials are extensively used for bone replacement and regeneration in orthopedic, dental, and maxillofacial surgical applications. In order for these biomaterials to work effectively it is imperative that they undergo the process of degradation and resorption in vivo. This allows for the space to be created for the new bone tissue to form and infiltrate within the implanted graft material. Several factors affect the biodegradation and resorption of calcium phosphate materials after implantation. Various cell types are involved in the degradation process by phagocytic mechanisms (monocytes/macrophages, fibroblasts, osteoblasts) or via an acidic mechanism to reduce the micro-environmental pH which results in demineralization of the cement matrix and resorption via osteoclasts. These cells exert their degradation effects directly or indirectly through the cytokine growth factor secretion and their sensitivity and response to these biomolecules. This article discusses the mechanisms of calcium phosphate material degradation in vivo.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".