A layer of hydrogel on PET dressings for low wound adherence and as a reservoir for new dendrimer based biocides for burn wound infection control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bacterial infection in burn wounds can jeopardize healing and can even lead to a patient’s death. Recently using a topical wound dressing with antimicrobial ability has been increasing. An ideal dressing for a burn wound is required to be antimicrobial, pain free and able to control the wound moisture to facilitate healing. In this research, a UV-radiation grafting method for depositing polyacrylamide (PAM) layer was used to improve the non-adherence properties of two commercially available silver based wound dressings. The dressing adherence, evaluated via an in vitro gelatine model, dramatically decreases after the deposition of PAM. This deposition did not negatively affect the antibacterial ability and cytotoxicity of the dressings. Furthermore, a poly(amidoamine) dendrimer based biocide was incorporated into PET dressings coated with poly(acrylic acid-co-acrylamide ) hydrogel. The resulting dressing was able to release a therapeutic dose of the antimicrobial agent in a sustained manner.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".