MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020874473 · doi:10.1517/17425247.3.1.139

Polymeric micelles for drug delivery

2005· review· en· W3020874473 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Drug Delivery · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMicelleDrug deliveryContext (archaeology)Ethylene oxideDrugPropylene oxideTargeted drug deliveryMaterials scienceDrug carrierPoly ethyleneNanotechnologyChemistryOrganic chemistryPolymerCopolymerPharmacologyEthyleneAqueous solutionMedicineCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polymeric micelles have been the subject of many studies in the field of drug delivery for the past two decades. The interest has specifically been focused on the potential application of polymeric micelles in three major areas in drug delivery: drug solubilisation, controlled drug release and drug targeting. In this context, polymeric micelles consisting of poly(ethylene oxide)-b-poly(propylene oxide), poly(ethylene oxide)-b-poly(ester)s and poly(ethylene oxide)-b-poly(amino acid)s have shown a great promise and are in the front line of development for various applications. The purpose of this manuscript is to provide an update on the current status of polymeric micelles for each application and highlight important parameters that may lead to the development of successful polymeric micellar systems for individual delivery requirements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.006

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.282 · 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