MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1594571717 · doi:10.5772/13707

Advances in Collagen/Hydroxyapatite Composite Materials

2011· book-chapter· en· W1594571717 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInTech eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibulaBone graftingMedicineAnkleCancellous boneTibiaDentistryHuman boneGraftingTransplantationSurgeryMaterials scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The annually necessary human bone grafts are in continuous grown due to the increasing of fractals, congenital and non-congenital diseases. Based on statistical reports (Murugan and Ramakrishna 2005), only in USA about 6.3 million fractures occur every year and about 550.000 of these require bone grafting. The most frequently fractures occur at the level of hip, ankle, tibia and fibula. Due to the higher physical effort, the men are more exposed to fracture than women (2.8% in the case of men comparing to 2.0% in the case of women). The number of fractures increases year by year and consequently many researchers from different research fields co-operate in order to develop new bone graft materials. Also, it is important to mention that, in the present, the bone diseases are overlapped only by hearth diseases. The history of bone grafting is starting in 1913 when Dr. D.E. Robertson assays a piece of cat’s bone and a piece of human bone for bone grafting into dogs (Gallie and Toronto 1914). The microscopic analysis of implanted graft after 20 days shows that the space between graft and living bone is filled with new cancellous bone. These early works made the premises for the development of the bone grafts. Due to the increasing of the necessarily bone grafts, autografts and allografts can not cover the overall need of bone grafts. For compensate this gap, artificial (synthetic) grafts are necessary and, consequently used. The use of synthetic grafts has some advantages versus allografts, autografts and xenografts: the possibility to obtain unlimited number/quantity of synthetic grafts, more safety use of artificial bone grafts without disease transmission risk, pain limitation by elimination of some secondary surgical intervention. The need of bone grafts materials lead to the synthesis of many kind of materials with different properties. Function of the nature of these materials and the relation between these grafts and the host tissue, these materials can be divided into 4 generations (Fig. 1). The components of the first generation of bone grafting biomaterials have remarkable mechanical properties but they are neither bioresorbable nor bioactive. More than, the use of these kind of bone grafts have limited lifetime (usually less than 10-15 years) and need to be extracted and replaced surgically. Some of the most representative biomaterials from the first generation of bone grafting biomaterials are: the iron, cobalt, chromium, titan or their alloys: steel (especially 316 L), cobalt or titan based alloys (Corces 2002; Corces and Garcia 2007) etc.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.194 · 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