MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transport of Carbon Quantum Dots Across Bovine Blood Retina Barrier

2025· article· W4416922500 on OpenAlexaff
Jisu Song, Howyn Tang, Chao Lu, Jin Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon and Quantum Dots Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum dotPermeationLuminescencePhotoluminescenceLayer (electronics)RetinaCarbon quantum dots

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tissue barriers limit the transport of drugs/imaging contract agents into the targeted site resulting in poor outcomes of diagnosis and therapeutic delivery. Carbon quantum dots (CQDs) have been applied as an alternative image contrast agent and theranostic carrier due to their special luminescent properties, versatile chemical modification, and good biocompatibility. The blood retina barrier (BRB) and the blood-brain barrier (BBB) has similar permeation and transport characteristics but is more readily available for study. Hence, this study investigates the transport of CQDs across the BRB using bovine eyes. CQD solution was added to the back of the bovine eye, and the photoluminescence in the neural retinal layer (NRL) and choroid layer (CL) before and after CQD treatment was measured. Under excitation (λex) at 430 nm, CQDs have a peak emission (λem) of 530 nm. In comparison, the NRL prior had no initial fluorescence. After treatment, there was one emission peak at 530 nm that corresponds with that of CQDs. In the CL, there were two pre-treatment emission peaks at 500 nm and 590 nm, with an additional peak at 530 nm after treatment. The results indicate that CQDs could cross the NRL into the CL and may have potential in crossing the BBB without any surface modification

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCarbon and Quantum Dots ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207