Safety and Toxicity Implications of Multifunctional Drug Delivery Nanocarriers on Reproductive Systems In Vitro and In Vivo
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the recent past, nanotechnological advancements in engineered nanomaterials have demonstrated diverse and versatile applications in different arenas, including bio-imaging, drug delivery, bio-sensing, detection and analysis of biological macromolecules, bio-catalysis, nanomedicine, and other biomedical applications. However, public interests and concerns in the context of human exposure to these nanomaterials and their consequential well-being may hamper the wider applicability of these nanomaterial-based platforms. Furthermore, human exposure to these nanosized and engineered particulate materials has also increased drastically in the last 2 decades due to enormous research and development and anthropocentric applications of nanoparticles. Their widespread use in nanomaterial-based industries, viz., nanomedicine, cosmetics, and consumer goods has also raised questions regarding the potential of nanotoxicity in general and reproductive nanotoxicology in particular. In this review, we have summarized diverse aspects of nanoparticle safety and their toxicological outcomes on reproduction and developmental systems. Various research databases, including PubMed and Google Scholar, were searched for the last 20 years up to the date of inception, and nano toxicological aspects of these materials on male and female reproductive systems have been described in detail. Furthermore, a discussion has also been dedicated to the placental interaction of these nanoparticles and how these can cross the blood-placental barrier and precipitate nanotoxicity in the developing offspring. Fetal abnormalities as a consequence of the administration of nanoparticles and pathophysiological deviations and aberrations in the developing fetus have also been touched upon. A section has also been dedicated to the regulatory requirements and guidelines for the testing of nanoparticles for their safety and toxicity in reproductive systems. It is anticipated that this review will incite a considerable interest in the research community functioning in the domains of pharmaceutical formulations and development in nanomedicine-based designing of therapeutic paradigms.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it