Hydoxyapatite/beta‐tricalcium phosphate biphasic ceramics as regenerative material for the repair of complex bone defects
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bone is a composite material composed of collagen and calcium phosphate (CaP) mineral. The collagen gives bone its flexibility while the inorganic material gives bone its resilience. The CaP in bone is similar in composition and structure to the mineral hydroxyapatite (HA) and is bioactive, osteoinductive and osteoconductive. Therefore synthetic versions of bone apatite (BA) have been developed to address the demand for autologous bone graft substitutes. Synthetic HA (s-HA) are stiff and strong, but brittle. These lack of physical attributes limit the use of synthetic apatites in situations where no physical loading of the apatite occurs. s-HA chemical properties differ from BA and thus change the physical and mechanical properties of the material. Consequently, s-HA is more chemically stable than BA and thus its resorption rate is slower than the rate of bone regeneration. One solution to this problem is to introduce a faster resorbing CaP, such as β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP), when synthesizing the material creating a biphasic (s-HA and β-TCP) formulation of calcium phosphate (BCP). The focus of this review is to introduce the major differences between BCP and biological apatites and how material scientists have overcome the inadequacies of the synthetic counterparts. Examples of BCP performance in vitro and in vivo following structural and chemical modifications are provided as well as novel ultrastructural data. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 106B: 2493-2512, 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 it