MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W566147286 · doi:10.1038/srep11194

Controlling the degradation kinetics of porous iron by poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) infiltration for use as temporary medical implants

2015· article· en· W566147286 on OpenAlexafffund
Abdul Hakim Md Yusop, Nurizzati Mohd Daud, Hadi Nur, Mohammed Rafiq Abdul Kadir, Hendra Hermawan

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéUniversiti Teknologi Malaysia
KeywordsPLGAGlycolic acidDegradation (telecommunications)KineticsPorosityIron oxideMaterials scienceChemical engineeringChemistryTitaniumLactic acidMetallurgyNanoparticleComposite materialNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Iron and its alloy have been proposed as biodegradable metals for temporary medical implants. However, the formation of iron oxide and iron phosphate on their surface slows down their degradation kinetics in both in vitro and in vivo scenarios. This work presents new approach to tailor degradation behavior of iron by incorporating biodegradable polymers into the metal. Porous pure iron (PPI) was vacuum infiltrated by poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) to form fully dense PLGA-infiltrated porous iron (PIPI) and dip coated into the PLGA to form partially dense PLGA-coated porous iron (PCPI). Results showed that compressive strength and toughness of the PIPI and PCPI were higher compared to PPI. A strong interfacial interaction was developed between the PLGA layer and the iron surface. Degradation rate of PIPI and PCPI was higher than that of PPI due to the effect of PLGA hydrolysis. The fast degradation of PIPI did not affect the viability of human fibroblast cells. Finally, this work discusses a degradation mechanism for PIPI and the effect of PLGA incorporation in accelerating the degradation of iron.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations93
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207