MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003271321 · doi:10.1155/2011/979527

Advances and Challenges in Islet Transplantation: Islet Procurement Rates and Lessons Learned from Suboptimal Islet Transplantation

2011· article· en· W2003271321 on OpenAlexafffund
Annette Plesner, C. Bruce Verchere

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transplantation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsIsletTransplantationMedicineOrgan procurementImmunologyInternal medicineInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The initial step in successful islet transplantation is procurement of healthy donor islets. Given the limited number of donor pancreata selected for islet isolation and that islets from multiple donors are typically required to obtain insulin independence, it is critical to improve pancreas procurement rates and yield of islets for transplantation. Islets are delicate microorgans that are susceptible to apoptosis, hypoxia, and ischemia during isolation, culture, and the peritransplant period. Once the islets are engrafted, both prompt revascularization and protection from beta-cell death and graft rejection are key to secure long-term survival and function. To facilitate the engraftment of more robust islets suitable for combating the challenging isolation period and proinflammatory transplantation milieu, numerous approaches have been employed to prevent beta-cell dysfunction and death including immune modulation, prevention of apoptosis and hypoxia, as well as stimulation of growth factors, angiogenesis, and reinnervation. In addition to briefly discussing islet isolation procedures, procurement rates, and islet transplantation, the relevant literature pertaining to successful suboptimal islet transplantation is reviewed to provide insight into potential approaches to balance the limited supply of available donor islets.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.548
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designObservational
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of TransplantationSame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207