MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206157397 · doi:10.3390/antibiotics11010107

Characterization of the Antibacterial Activity of an SiO2 Nanoparticular Coating to Prevent Bacterial Contamination in Blood Products

2022· article· en· W4206157397 on OpenAlexaff
Sahra Fonseca, Marie‐Pierre Cayer, K. M. Tanvir Ahmmed, Nima Khadem-Mohtaram, Steve J. Charette, Danny Brouard

Bibliographic record

VenueAntibiotics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAntimicrobial agents and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalGlaxoSmithKline (Canada)Héma-Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContaminationCoatingSiliconeAntibacterial activityBacteriaMedicineChemistryBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technological innovations and quality control processes within blood supply organizations have significantly improved blood safety for both donors and recipients. Nevertheless, the risk of transfusion-transmitted infection remains non-negligible. Applying a nanoparticular, antibacterial coating at the surface of medical devices is a promising strategy to prevent the spread of infections. In this study, we characterized the antibacterial activity of an SiO2 nanoparticular coating (i.e., the “Medical Antibacterial and Antiadhesive Coating” [MAAC]) applied on relevant polymeric materials (PM) used in the biomedical field. Electron microscopy revealed a smoother surface for the MAAC-treated PM compared to the reference, suggesting antiadhesive properties. The antibacterial activity was tested against selected Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria in accordance with ISO 22196. Bacterial growth was significantly reduced for the MAAC-treated PVC, plasticized PVC, polyurethane and silicone (90–99.999%) in which antibacterial activity of ≥1 log reduction was reached for all bacterial strains tested. Cytotoxicity was evaluated following ISO 10993-5 guidelines and L929 cell viability was calculated at ≥90% in the presence of MAAC. This study demonstrates that the MAAC could prevent bacterial contamination as demonstrated by the ISO 22196 tests, while further work needs to be done to improve the coating processability and effectiveness of more complex matrices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntibioticsSame topicAntimicrobial agents and applicationsFrench-language works237,207