Spectrometric method for simultaneous quantification of nadifloxacin and salicylic acid in a novel topical dosage form
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• A novel method for simultaneous and quantitative assessment of nadifloxacin and salicylic acid in various dosage forms. • The method has been validated following the guidelines of ICH. • The present procedures follows greenness of analytical when appraise for environmental sustainability and greenness. Acne vulgaris is a prevalent skin disorder that affects many individuals. In the search for effective acne therapy, researchers have found that a combination of Nadifloxacin and Salicylic Acid may produce a synergistic effect. To further investigate this, a study was conducted to devise a spectrophotometric method for simultaneously measuring the concentrations of Nadifloxacin and Salicylic Acid in a novel topical formulation. Simultaneous Estimation Method was employed using methanol as the solvent. Nadifloxacin exhibited an absorbance maximum of 291 nm, while Salicylic Acid showed an absorbance maximum of 297 nm in methanol. Linearity experiments were conducted to determine the concentration ranges for both drugs, which were found to be 2–12 ppm for Nadifloxacin and 5–30 ppm for Salicylic Acid. The recovery results of Nadifloxacin ranged from 82 % to 95 %, while those of Salicylic Acid ranged from 97 % to 110 %. These results indicate the accuracy and reliability of the method. This method was further validated in accordance with the guidelines provided by the International Council for Harmonization (ICH) of Technical Requirements for Human Use. The proposed method has demonstrated its applicability for the simultaneous and quantitative assessment of Nadifloxacin and Salicylic Acid in various dosage forms. This development is significant as it provides a reliable and efficient means of measuring the concentrations of these two drugs in acne therapy formulations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".