RETRACTED ARTICLE: Plasma Protein Adsorption to Zwitterionic Poly (Carboxybetaine Methacrylate) Modified Surfaces: Chain Chemistry and End-Group Effects on Protein Adsorption Kinetics, Adsorbed Amounts and Immunoblots
Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Protein-surface interactions are crucial to the overall biocompatability of biomaterials, and are thought to be the impetus towards the adverse host responses such as blood coagulation and complement activation. Only a few studies hint at the ultra-low fouling potential of zwitterionic poly(carboxybetaine methacrylate) (PCBMA) grafted surfaces and, of those, very few systematically investigate their non-fouling behavior. In this work, single protein adsorption studies as well as protein adsorption from complex solutions (i.e. human plasma) were used to evaluate the non-fouling potential of PCBMA grafted silica wafers prepared by nitroxide-mediated free radical polymerization. PCBMAs used for surface grafting varied in charge separating spacer groups that influence the overall surface charges, and chain end-groups that influence the overall hydrophilicity, thereby, allows a better understanding of these effects towards the protein adsorption for these materials. In situ ellipsometry was used to quantify the adsorbed layer thickness and adsorption kinetics for the adsorption of four proteins from single protein buffer solutions, viz, lysozyme, α-lactalbumin, human serum albumin and fibrinogen. Total amount of protein adsorbed on surfaces differed as a function of surface properties and protein characteristics. Finally, immunoblots results showed that human plasma protein adsorption to these surfaces resulted, primarily, in the adsorption of human serum albumin, with total protein adsorbed amounts being the lowest for PCBMA-3 (TEMPO). It was apparent that surface charge and chain hydrophilicity directly influenced protein adsorption behavior of PCBMA systems and are promising materials for biomedical applications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.025 |
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".