MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997823368 · doi:10.1155/2014/976321

Autologous Cord Blood Therapy for Infantile Cerebral Palsy: From Bench to Bedside

2014· review· en· W1997823368 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Arne Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology International · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStem Cell Network
KeywordsMedicineCerebral palsyUmbilical cordCord bloodPediatricsClinical trialIntensive care medicinePhysical therapyPathologyInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

About 17 million people worldwide live with cerebral palsy, the most common disability in childhood, with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, preterm birth, and low birth weight being the most important risk factors. This review will focus on recent developments in cell therapy for infantile cerebral palsy by transplantation of autologous umbilical cord blood. There are only 4 publications available at present; however, the observations made along with experimental data in vivo and in vitro may be of utmost importance clinically, so that a review at an early developmental stage of this new therapeutic concept seems justified. Particularly, since the first published double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial in a paradigm using allogeneic cord blood and erythropoietin to treat cerebral palsy under immunosuppression showed beneficial therapeutic effects in infantile cerebral palsy, long-held doubts about the efficacy of this new cell therapy are dispelled and a revision of therapeutic views upon an ailment, for which there is no cure at present, is warranted. Hence, this review will summarize the available information on autologous cord blood therapy for cerebral palsy and that on the relevant experimental work as far as potential mechanisms and modes of action are concerned.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and Gynecology InternationalSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207