Zeolite as a Bone Bio-Modifier Carrier: An In-Vitro Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Zeolite is a microporous aluminosilicate compound which has been successfully used in tissue engineering. The effects of Zeolite on the morphology and functions of pre-osteoblastic MG-63 cells as new bone enhancer material is still unclear. Methods: In this vitro experimental study, MTT and Alizarin red staining test were performed on six groups of MG-63 cells which differed in Zeolite (Z) concentration and the presence or absence of Alloplast extract (A). Group A: 0.1μg/mL Z+A, Group B: 0.1μg/mL Z without A, Group C: 0.2μg/mL Z+A, Group D: 0.2μg/mL Z without A, Group E: 0.3μg/mL Z+A, Group F: 0.3μg/mL Z without A. There were also three control groups as positive control, negative control, and Alloplast control based on each related test. The data were analyzed by SPSS 20 via one-way ANOVA and Welch test. (P<0.05). Results: At 24 hours, results showed that solutions with 0.1μg/mL, 0.2μg/mL, and 0.3μg/mL Zeolite with or without Alloplast had significantly higher proliferation rates than positive control (distilled water) groups without Alloplast (p<0.001). At 72hours time point, the results showed significantly higher proliferation rates in the solutions with 0.1μg/mL, 0.2μg/mL, and 0.3μg/mL Zeolite with or without Alloplast compared to the positive control group without Alloplast (p<0.001). Conclusions: Zeolite can increase proliferation of MG-63 cells without presence of Alloplast; It seems that combination of Zeolite with Alloplast maybe enhancing proliferation and function of MG-63 cells.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".