MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1481339916 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2015.00050

Stem Cells and Their Mediators – Next Generation Therapy for Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia

2015· review· en· W1481339916 on OpenAlexafffund
Marius A. Möbius, Bernard Thébaud

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersStudienstiftung des Deutschen VolkesCanadian Lung AssociationStem Cell NetworkCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsBronchopulmonary dysplasiaProgenitor cellStem cellMesenchymal stem cellMedicineEmbryonic stem cellRegenerative medicineBioinformaticsStromal cellRegeneration (biology)ImmunologyBiologyPathologyCell biologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) remains a major complication of premature birth. Despite great achievements in perinatal medicine over the past decades, there is no treatment for BPD. Recent insights into the biology of stem/progenitor cells have ignited the hope of regenerating damaged organs. Animal experiments revealed promising lung protection/regeneration with stem/progenitor cells in experimental models of BPD and led to first clinical studies in infants. However, these therapies are still experimental and knowledge on the exact mechanisms of action of these cells is limited. Furthermore, heterogeneity of the therapeutic cell populations and missing potency assays currently limit our ability to predict a cell product's efficacy. Here, we review the therapeutic potential of mesenchymal stromal, endothelial progenitor, and amniotic epithelial cells for BPD. Current knowledge on the mechanisms behind the beneficial effects of stem cells is briefly summarized. Finally, we discuss the obstacles constraining their transition from bench-to-bedside and present potential approaches to overcome them.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations29
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207