MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987486932 · doi:10.4161/org.4.4.7082

Adipose tissue engineering with cells in engineered matrices

2008· article· en· W1987486932 on OpenAlexaff
Lauren E. Flynn, Kimberly A. Woodhouse

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganogenesis · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMesenchymal stem cell research
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Sciences CentreQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdipose tissueTissue engineeringBiomedical engineeringBiologyMedicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tissue engineering has shown promise for the development of constructs to facilitate large volume soft tissue augmentation in reconstructive and cosmetic plastic surgery. This article reviews the key progress to date in the field of adipose tissue engineering. In order to effectively design a soft tissue substitute, it is critical to understand the native tissue environment and function. As such, the basic physiology of adipose tissue is described and the process of adipogenesis is discussed. In this article, we have focused on tissue engineering using a cell-seeded scaffold approach, where engineered extracellular matrix substitutes are seeded with exogenous cells that may contribute to the regenerative response. The strengths and limitations of each of the possible cell sources for adipose tissue engineering, including adipose-derived stem cells, are detailed. We briefly highlight some of the results from the major studies to date, involving a range of synthetic and naturally derived scaffolds. While these studies have shown that adipose tissue regeneration is possible, more research is required to develop optimized constructs that will facilitate safe, predictable and long-term augmentation in clinical applications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.221 · 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.

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

Citations92
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganogenesisSame topicMesenchymal stem cell researchFrench-language works237,207