MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922359134 · doi:10.1002/jbm.b.34353

Impact of trivalent ions on the stability and cohesion of calcium polyphosphate coacervates for embolization applications

2019· article· en· W2922359134 on OpenAlexafffund
Esther M. Valliant, Mark Filiaggi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B Applied Biomaterials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and Angioedema
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCoacervatePolyphosphateMaterials scienceDissolutionCalciumTrisHydroxymethylIonPhosphateNuclear chemistryChemical engineeringMetallurgyChemistryBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Polyphosphates (PPs) are of interest as temporary in situ setting embolic agents for which cohesive characteristics are vital. Trivalent ions Al3+ and Ga3+ were substituted into calcium PP up to 10 mol % for two PP chain lengths (degree of polymerization, Dp 200 and 9000) and the effect on the dissolution rate of the resulting coacervate was examined. High levels of trivalent ions were found to increase the dissolution rate, especially with aluminum (Al) where the coacervate with the greatest Al content (10 mol %) and larger Dp completely dissolved within the first few hours in tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane buffered saline. Conversely, small amounts of trivalent ions slowed the dissolution rate of the coacervates compared to those containing calcium only. The coacervate compositions determined to have the fastest and slowest ion release were evaluated for cohesion upon injection into a simulated blood vessel using a dual lumen needle. PPs with lower trivalent content had a higher coacervate yield overall, with 5% Ga and Dp 200 yielding the smallest proportion of coacervate particulates that could be implicated in unwanted distal embolization. However, further studies are required to evaluate the formation and duration of occlusions in vivo so that the PP composition can best be tailored to meet clinical requirements. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 107B:2638–2648, 2019.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B Applied BiomaterialsSame topicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and AngioedemaFrench-language works237,207