Eco-friendly ultraviolet spectrophotometric methods for the determination of clotrimazole and tinidazole in bulk and ointment dosage form
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyzing a drug over its overlapped spectra utilizes sophisticated instruments and more toxic solvents, which has a deleterious effect on environmental safety. There is an alarming need to develop a simple, novel, and cost-effective method for determining combined substances that are non-toxic to the environment. So, the study aimed to develop four simple, fast and eco-friendly spectrophotometric techniques for quantifying clotrimazole and tinidazole in bulk and ointment dosage form. Stock solutions produced at concentrations of 7 to 13 and 17.5 to 32.5 µg/mL of clotrimazole and tinidazole in 10% v/v ethanol and scanned in the UV-visible range 200-450 nm, and used for all methods. The methods were validated according to the International Council for Harmonization guidelines and found to be within limits. Additionally, the outliers were tested by using the Grubbers test and found within limits. Finally, green evaluation studies show that the method is more environmentally friendly, as confirmed by four assessment tools.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".