MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2368174756

Optimization of Andrographolide Solid Lipid Nanoparticles by Central Composite Design and Response Surface Methodology

2012· article· en· W2368174756 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Journal of Pharmaceuticals · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAndrographolide Research and Applications
Canadian institutionsL'Alliance Boviteq
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAndrographolideSolid lipid nanoparticleChemistryPulmonary surfactantCentral composite designResponse surface methodologyChromatographyLecithinNanoparticleParticle sizeMaterials scienceNanotechnologyOrganic chemistryBiochemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Andrographolide solid lipid nanoparticles were prepared by high pressure homogenization.The influence of the ratio of drug to lipid materials(the mixture of glycerin monostearate and Compritol ATO 888 with the ratio of 1∶1),ratio of lecithin to lipid materials and the concentration of surfactant(Tween-80) on entrapment efficiency and drug loading were investigated by central composite design.The results fit with multiple linear and binomial equation and the optimal formulation was predicted by response surface methodology.The results showed that there was a well correlation for drug loading by multiple linear regression while for entrapment efficiency the binomial equation was superior to the multiple linear regression.The optimal formulation was as follows: the ratio of drug to lipid materials was 9%,the ratio of lecithin to lipid materials was 1.6,and the concentration of Tween-80 was 3%.The entrapment efficiency,drug loading,mean diameter and ζ potential of the product were(91.0±0.9)%,(3.49±0.03)%,(286.3±8.0)nm and(-20.6±0.2)mV,respectively.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.348 · 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