MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989007981 · doi:10.1002/adfm.200700116

Engineering Functional Collagen Scaffolds: Cyclical Loading Increases Material Strength and Fibril Aggregation

2007· article· en· W1989007981 on OpenAlexaff
Umber Cheema, Cher Bing Chuo, Padmini Sarathchandra, Showan N. Nazhat, Robert A. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Functional Materials · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCollagen: Extraction and Characterization
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibrilMaterials scienceUltimate tensile strengthCollagen fibrilScaffoldFusionComposite materialElongationBiophysicsNanotechnologyBiomedical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Variation in collagen fibril diameter in nature is a major factor determining biological material properties. However, the mechanism resulting in this fibril diameter difference is not clear and generally assumed to be cell‐dependent. It is certainly not possible so far to engineer this into implantable scaffold materials. This gap in our knowledge is crucial for the fabrication of truly biomimetic tissue‐like materials. We have tested the idea that fibril diameter can be regulated directly without cell involvement, using cyclical mechanical loading to promote fibril fusion. Specific loading regimes increased collagen fibril diameter (> 2 fold) in direct relation to cycle number, whilst thin fibrils disappeared. Tensile properties increased, producing a 4.5 fold rise in break strength. This represents the first demonstration of direct cyclical load‐promoted fibril fusion and provides a direct relation with material properties. The ability to control material properties in this way makes it possible to fabricate truly biomimetic collagen materials without 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations62
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Functional MaterialsSame topicCollagen: Extraction and CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207