MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978226830 · doi:10.2217/17460751.3.5.761

Catalyzing Stem Cell Research

2008· article· en· W1978226830 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueRegenerative Medicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsStem Cell Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThrivingStem cellNature versus nurtureClinical trialMedicinePublic relationsPolitical scienceSociologyPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2001, the Stem Cell Network was the first of its kind, a bold initiative to forge and nurture pan-Canadian collaborations involving researchers, engineers, clinicians and private and public sector partners. Canada's broad and deep pool of stem cell talent proved to be a fertile ground for such an initiative, giving rise to a strong, thriving network that, 7 years later, can list innovative cell expansion and screening technologies, early-phase clinical trials for stroke, pulmonary hypertension, muscular dystrophy and cornea replacement, and leading discourse on ethical, legal and social issues among its accomplishments. As it moves into its second and final phase of funding, the Stem Cell Network continues to push boundaries and has set its sights on overcoming the obstacles that impede the transfer of research findings to clinical applications, commercial products and public policy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.275
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.141 · 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