Biocompatibility assessment of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in mice fetoplacental unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As the applications of titanium dioxide nanomaterials (nTiO 2 ) are growing with an ever‐increasing speed, the hazardous risks of this material have become a major concern. Several recent studies have reported that nTiO 2 can cross the placental barrier in pregnant mice and cause neurotoxicity in their offspring. However, the influence of these nanoparticles on the fetoplacental unit during the pregnancy is yet to be studied. The present study reports on the effects of nTiO 2 on the anatomical structure of fetal brain and liver in a pregnant mice model. Moreover, changes in the size and weight of the fetus and placenta are investigated as markers of fetal growth. Lastly, the toxicity of nTiO 2 in primary brain and liver is quantified. Animals treated with nTiO 2 showed a disrupted anatomical structure of the fetal brain and liver. Furthermore, the fetus and placental unit in the mice treated with these nanoparticles were smaller compared to untreated controls. Toxicity analyses revealed that nTiO 2 was toxic to the brain and liver cells and the mechanism of cell death was mostly necrosis. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 106A: 580–589, 2018.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".