MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383373184 · doi:10.1007/s12221-023-00260-2

Influence of Tubular Braid’s Structures on Wicking Behaviours: An Experimental Investigation

2023· article· en· W4383373184 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ghazal Ghamkhar, Mehrdad Arianpour, Mahdi Bodaghi

Bibliographic record

VenueFibers and Polymers · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Sutures and Adhesives
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTrent UniversityNottingham Trent University
KeywordsBraidMaterials scienceFibrous jointComposite materialAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Avoiding wicking in a suture to recover the wound and avoid infection is critical. In this paper, the capillary rise method is applied to evaluate the wicking property of tubular braided structures. Effects of the tubular braid’s structural parameters, namely braid angle, interlacement pattern, structural axis, and the position of the yarns parallel to the axis are investigated. The results indicate that with the increase in braid angle, the wicking height descends and has the greatest effect on the wicking property among the studied parameters. It is also observed that under the same braid angle, the wicking height of the Two over Two braid is larger than the regular braid. Moreover, the presence of core yarns in a braided structure increases the wicking height. Among the studied parameters, the structural axis does not have a significant effect on this behavior. The results of statistical study confirm the experimental data and show that it is better to use biaxial braided structures with a regular pattern in the production of braided sutures. This work not only examines some factors effect on a vital feature of the braided suture but also underlines the importance of choosing the braid suture. Graphical abstract

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFibers and PolymersSame topicSurgical Sutures and AdhesivesFrench-language works237,207