One-step preparation of double emulsions stabilized with amphiphilic and stimuli-responsive block copolymers and nanoparticles for nutraceuticals and drug delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One-step emulsification approaches enable prevention of the loss of emulsion droplets associated with two-step emulsification approaches. Stimuli-responsive amphiphilic block copolymers, emulsifiers, and nanoparticles that are responsive to changes in the temperature, pH, presence of CO2, or presence of salts, can eliminate the requirement for two hydrophilic and lipophilic emulsifiers in the emulsion system. The amphiphilic block copolymers prepared from naturally occurring amino acids and proteins enable targeted delivery of drugs and nutraceuticals with high cellular uptake. Likewise, the presence of impurities, such as salts and redox reactions driven by the presence of iodine, can result in spontaneous emulsification and formation of double emulsions. This timely review focuses on the application of double emulsions for delivery of drugs and nutraceuticals and will provide insights to scientists in the pharmaceutical industry or food nutritionists who consider fortification of food products with micronutrients.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".