Preparation and properties of nepeta oil-oxymatrine lipidosome pro vagina thermosensitive gel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To prepare the nepeta oil-oxymatrine(OMT) lipidosome pro vagina thermosensitive gel, and to investigate its in vitro drug release behavior. Methods P-407 and P-188 were used as gel matrix to prepare the gel, and gelatinization temperature was applied as a target to optimize the prescription. The OMT lipidosome was prepared based on the multiple emulsion method, and the nepeta oil-OMT lipidosome pro vagina thermosensitive gel was obtained by cold-dissolving method. The content of OMT was determined by HPLC, and in vitro release properties of nepeta oil-OMT lipidosome thermosensitive in situ gel was investigated by dialysis method. Results After optimization, the gel prescription was finally confirmed as 18% P-407, 5% P-188, and 0.2% hydroxy-propyl methyl cellulose(HPMC). The gelatination temperature for nepeta oil-OMT lipidosome thermosensitive gel was(36.8 ± 0.2) ℃, and the in vitro accumulating release ratio of sinomenine in the nepeta oil-OMT lipidosome gel system was(58.89 ± 0.34) % and(66.38 ± 0.12) % after 48 h. Conclusion The prepared nepeta oil-OMT lipidosome thermosensitive gel has the temperature sensitivity and sustained release effect, can effectively delay the release of the drug in vagina and improve the residence time in the vagina.
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".