Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the in vitro release kinetics of different brands of metformin HCl tablets available in the local pharmaceutical market of Bangladesh.For this study, six widely prescribed brands M1, M2, M3, M4, M5 and M6 were chosen.All of these brands were of 500 mg metformin HCl with strip packaging.The dissolution was carried out using USP apparatus-II and the analysis was performed with the UV spectroscopy.To find out the release kinetics K0 (for zero order), K1 (for first order), Kh (for Higuchi model), K and n (for Korsmeyer-Peppas model) and KHC (for Hixon Crowell model) were determined.The R 2 value for each kinetics was also determined which indicated the linearity of release kinetics for each brand.The study found no brand to follow the zero order kinetics mostly.Brand M1 mainly followed the first order (R 2 =0.982) and the Hixon-Crowell model (R 2 =0.982) whereas M2 followed the Higuchi model (R 2 =0.979).At the same time brands M3 and M4 were found to follow Korsmeyer-Peppas (R 2 =0.996 and 0.992 respectively) and Hixon-Crowell model (R 2 =0.992 and 0.991 respectively).However, brand M5 and M6 followed Hixon-Crowell equation with the R 2 value of 0.984 and 0.988 consecutively.So this study assumes that the available metformin HCl tablet brands available in Bangladesh generally follow the Hixon-Crowell release kinetics.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.900 | 0.909 |
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".