MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972962509 · doi:10.1177/0022034511402207

Epithelial Integrins with Special Reference to Oral Epithelia

2011· review· en· W1972962509 on OpenAlexaff
Hannu Larjava, Leeni Koivisto, Lari Häkkinen, Jyrki Heino

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dental Research · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCell Adhesion Molecules Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial ResearchMarch of Dimes FoundationAugustinus FondenNational Institutes of HealthEgmont FondenNational Human Genome Research Institute
KeywordsJunctional epitheliumExtracellular matrixIntegrinEpitheliumCell biologyInflammationFibronectinPathologyMedicineChemistryBiologyReceptorImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adhesion of epithelium to the extracellular matrix is crucial for the maintenance of systemic and oral health. In the oral cavity, teeth or artificial dental implants penetrate the soft tissue of the gingiva. In this interface, gingival soft tissue needs to be well attached via the epithelial seal to the tooth or implant surface to maintain health. After injury or wounding, epithelial tissue rapidly migrates to form the initial epithelial cover to restore the barrier against infection. These events are crucially dependent on deposition of extracellular matrix and proper activation and function of integrin receptors in the epithelial cells. Recent experimental evidence suggests that epithelial integrins also participate in the regulation of periodontal inflammation. In this review, we will discuss the structure and function of epithelial integrins and their extracellular ligands and elaborate on their potential role in disease and repair processes in the oral cavity.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.288
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations120
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dental ResearchSame topicCell Adhesion Molecules ResearchFrench-language works237,207