MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2407185709 · doi:10.3390/nano6060100

Fabricating Water Dispersible Superparamagnetic Iron Oxide Nanoparticles for Biomedical Applications through Ligand Exchange and Direct Conjugation

2016· article· en· W2407185709 on OpenAlexaff
Tina Lam, Pramod Avti, Philippe Pouliot, Foued Maafi, Jean‐Claude Tardif, Éric Rhéaume, Frédéric Lesage, Ashok Kakkar

Bibliographic record

VenueNanomaterials · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalPolytechnique MontréalMontreal Heart InstituteMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLigand (biochemistry)NanoparticlePhosphonateColloidMagnetic nanoparticlesMaterials scienceIron oxide nanoparticlesNanotechnologyChemistryChemical engineeringIron oxideOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stable superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs), which can be easily dispersed in an aqueous medium and exhibit high magnetic relaxivities, are ideal candidates for biomedical applications including contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging. We describe a versatile methodology to render water dispersibility to SPIONs using tetraethylene glycol (TEG)-based phosphonate ligands, which are easily introduced onto SPIONs by either a ligand exchange process of surface-anchored oleic-acid (OA) molecules or via direct conjugation. Both protocols confer good colloidal stability to SPIONs at different NaCl concentrations. A detailed characterization of functionalized SPIONs suggests that the ligand exchange method leads to nanoparticles with better magnetic properties but higher toxicity and cell death, than the direct conjugation methodology.

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)0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations35
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanomaterialsSame topicNanoparticle-Based Drug DeliveryFrench-language works237,207