MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999626649 · doi:10.2174/1875043501104010021

Umbilical Cord Lining Membrane and Wharton's Jelly-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells: the Similarities and Differences

2011· article· en· W1999626649 on OpenAlexaff
Marc G. Jeschke

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMesenchymal stem cell research
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWharton's jellyUmbilical cordMesenchymal stem cellCord liningStem cellCell biologyBiologyAdult stem cellAnatomyCellular differentiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The umbilical cord tissue has gained attention in recent years as a source of multipotent cells. Due to its widespread availability, the umbilical cord may be an excellent alternative source of cells for regenerative medicine. Anatomically, umbilical cord tissue is constituted of several different parts, and, accordingly, immunostaining of cord tissue sections revealed differential distribution of several markers and extracellular matrix, distinguishing the various layers. Wharton's jelly is the major component filling the inner part of the umbilical cord tissue, and it has been commonly used as a source of obtaining multipotent cells from umbilical cord. We recently reported isolating mesenchymal stem cells from cord lining membrane (sub-amnion). However, because of several anatomically distinct zones found in the umbilical cord, isolated multipotent cells sometimes show heterogeneity. In addition, differences in isolation technique may lead to further variation. In this review, we discuss the similarities and differences between the cells derived from each sub-region, including sub-amnion as recently reported by us. We further explore the specific features and advantages/disadvantages of Wharton's jelly and the other sub-compartments in the umbilical cord tissue as sources of stem cells/multipotent 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 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)0.002
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 score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations41
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine JournalSame topicMesenchymal stem cell researchFrench-language works237,207