MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1561427403 · doi:10.1089/scd.2008.0012

Human Dental Pulp Stem Cells Differentiate into Neural Crest-Derived Melanocytes and Have Label-Retaining and Sphere-Forming Abilities

2008· article· en· W1561427403 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Angelique Stevens, Thomas Zuliani, Cécile Olejnik, Helene LeRoy, Hélène Obriot, Julie Kerr‐Conte, Pierre Formstecher, Yves Bailliez, Renata Polakowska

Bibliographic record

VenueStem Cells and Development · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMesenchymal stem cell research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut National Du CancerInstitute of Cancer ResearchInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale
KeywordsBiologyMesenchymal stem cellNeural crestMultipotent Stem CellOdontoblastStem cellDental pulp stem cellsCell biologyAdult stem cellStem cell transplantation for articular cartilage repairAnatomyPulp (tooth)ImmunologyEndothelial stem cellPathologyProgenitor cellIn vitroMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adult tissues contain highly proliferative, clonogenic cells that meet criteria of multipotent stem cells and are potential sources for autologous reparative and reconstructive medicine. We demonstrated that human dental pulp contains self renewing human dental pulp stem cells (hDPSCs) capable of differentiating into mesenchymal-derived odontoblasts, osteoblasts, adipocytes, and chondrocytes and striated muscle, and interestingly, also into non-mesenchymal melanocytes. Furthermore, we showed that hDPSC cultures include cells with the label-retaining and sphere-forming abilities, traits attributed to multipotent stem cells, and provide evidence that these may be multipotent neural crest stem cells.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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)0.0020.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations160
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStem Cells and DevelopmentSame topicMesenchymal stem cell researchFrench-language works237,207