MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fetal development, mechanobiology and optimal control processes can improve vascular tissue regeneration in bioreactors: An integrative review

2011· review· en· W2004482827 on OpenAlexafffund
Frédéric Couët, Sébastien Meghezi, Diego Mantovani

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Engineering & Physics · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMechanobiologyMechanotransductionScaffoldRegeneration (biology)Tissue engineeringBioreactorProcess (computing)Biomedical engineeringBiofabricationBiologyCell biologyComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vascular tissue engineering aims to regenerate blood vessels to replace diseased arteries for cardiovascular patients. With the scaffold-based approach, cells are seeded on a scaffold showing specific properties and are expected to proliferate and self-organize into a functional vascular tissue. Bioreactors can significantly contribute to this objective by providing a suitable environment for the maturation of the tissue engineered blood vessel. It is recognized from the mechanotransduction principles that mechanical stimuli can influence the protein synthesis of the extra-cellular matrix thus leading to maturation and organization of the tissues. Up to date, no bioreactor is especially conceived to take advantage of the mechanobiology and optimize the construct maturation through an advanced control strategy. In this review, experimental strategies in the field of vascular tissue engineering are detailed, and a new approach inspired by fetal development, mechanobiology and optimal control paradigms is proposed. In this new approach, the culture conditions (i.e. flow, circumferential strain, pressure frequency, and others) are supposed to dynamically evolve to match the maturity of vascular constructs and maximize the efficiency of the regeneration process. Moreover, this approach allows the investigation of the mechanisms of growth, remodeling and mechanotransduction during the culture.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations26
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Engineering & PhysicsSame topicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207