Orally disintegrating drug carriers for paediatric pharmacotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-compliance, dosing inaccuracy, choking risk, flavour, and instability, are some of the issues associated with paediatric, oral dosage forms - tablets, capsules, solutions, and suspensions. Orally disintegrating drug carriers, a dosage form with growing interest, are thought to overcome several of the challenges associated with these conventional formulations by rapidly disintegrating within the buccal cavity without the need for water. This review serves as an up-to-date report on the various types of orodispersible delivery systems, currently being developed or commercialized, by detailing their characteristics, manufacturing processes, and applications in the paediatric population. Mentioned are orodispersible tablets, films, wafers and lyophilisates, mini-tablets, capsules, granules, electrospun fibers and webs. Also highlighted are the choice of excipients, quality control requirements, and expected pharmacokinetics of orally disintegrating drug carriers concerning the paediatric population. Overall, orodispersible formulations, particularly tablets, films, and lyophilisates/wafers, have shown to be a valuable addition to medication administration in minors, thus the execution of more targeted research and development activities is expected to lead to enhanced paediatric care and outcomes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".