MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087053054 · doi:10.5530/pj.2020.12.178

Comparison of Cytotoxicity between Ethyl Acetate and Ethanol Extract of White Turmeric (Kaempferia rotunda) Rhizome Extract Against HeLa Cervical Cancer Cell Activity

2020· article· en· W3087053054 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacognosy Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicGinger and Zingiberaceae research
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)
FundersFakultas Kedokteran, Universitas IndonesiaUniversitas Indonesia
KeywordsEthyl acetateHeLaFlavonoidRhizomeChemistryTraditional medicineCytotoxicityPhytochemicalEthanolMTT assayQuercetinIC50ChromatographyIn vitroBiochemistryMedicineAntioxidant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study is to compare between ethanol and ethyl acetate rhizome extract of K.rotunda against HeLa cervical cancer cell in vitro. Material and Methods: Methods used in this research are test the chemical compound of extracts using Thin Layer Chromatography (TLC) and phytochemical screening test, also cytotoxicity test using MTT assay. Result: Ethyl acetate extract contains flavonoid, alkaloid, tannin, and triterpenoid, while ethanol extract have flavonoid, triterpenoid, and alkaloid. In addition, ethanol extract has strong cytotoxic activity (IC 50 = 16,939 g/ml) while ethyl acetate extract has moderate cytotoxic activity (IC 50 = 127,9 g/ml). Each of extracts showed significant results (p 0,05) although when compared between concentrations there are several concentrations that are not significant and also small coefficient of determinant values caused by various confounding factors.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.242
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.261 · 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