Comparison of Chitosan-lactic Acid-poly vinyl alcohol and Chitosan-hydroxyapatite Composite Membrane as Wound Healing Accelerator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wound healing is a complex biochemical process and may be promoted by moist wound dressings, which helps in maintaining a suitable micro-environment favorable for migration and proliferation of fibroblast cells. Chitosan has been used by many researchers to develop various wound healing products. The current study deals with the development of chitosan-poly (vinyl alcohol) blended membrane and chitosan-hydroxyapatite composite membrane. The membranes were prepared using lactic acid as solvent. The developed membranes were characterized for their mechanical strength hemocompatibility. Membranes demonstrated significantly different mechanical strength and hemocompatibilty. Further, preliminary results indicated that the developed membranes could be tried as wound dressing materials. The afore-mentioned membranes were used as wound dressing materials for the treatment of surgically induced wounds in matured Sprague-Dawley rats. The wound healing results indicated that the healing rate was faster with the chitosan-hydroxyapatite membrane
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".