MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889494869 · doi:10.1080/09205063.2018.1514192

Determination of the release of PEG and HPMC from nelfilcon A daily disposable contact lenses using a novel <i>in vitro</i> eye model

2018· article· en· W2889494869 on OpenAlexaff
Chau‐Minh Phan, H. Walther, Richard Smith, D. E. Riederer, Charis Lau, Kathrine Osborn Lorenz, Lakshman N. Subbaraman, Lyndon Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomaterials Science Polymer Edition · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersJohnson and Johnson
KeywordsPEG ratioPolyethylene glycolChromatographyWettingMaterials scienceArtificial tearsPhosphate buffered salineContact lensPEGylationBiomedical engineeringChemistryComposite materialSurgeryOphthalmologyBiochemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The traditional method to measure release of components from CLs is a vial containing a static volume of PBS (phosphate buffered saline). However, this model does not simulate physiologically relevant tear volume and natural tear flow, air exposure, and mechanical rubbing. These factors can significantly impact release kinetics. We have developed an in vitro eye model (OcuFlow) that simulates these parameters. The aim of the study was to measure the release of PEG (polyethylene glycol), and HPMC (hydroxypropyl methylcellulose) from a daily disposable hydrogel contact lens material (nelfilcon A; Dailies AquaComfort PLUS; DACP;) over 24 hrs using the OcuFlow platform. The elution of PEG and HPMC from DACP lenses was analyzed using LCMS (liquid chromatography mass spectrometry). The release of all wetting agents from the lenses followed a burst release pattern, which occurred within the first 1.5 hrs (P < 0.05). The release of PEG was greater than that of HPMC (P < 0.05). The amount of PEG and HPMC released at any given time was less than 1% of the amount in the blister pack solution. Our results suggest that HPMC and PEG are rapidly released from the CL.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomaterials Science Polymer EditionSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207