MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021839551 · doi:10.1089/ten.tec.2012.0524

Differentiation of Human Embryonic Stem Cells Using Size-Controlled Embryoid Bodies and Negative Cell Selection in the Production of Photoreceptor Precursor Cells

2013· article· en· W2021839551 on OpenAlexafffund
Anat Yanai, Christopher Laver, Aaron W. Joe, Ishaq A. Viringipurampeer, Xia Wang, Cheryl Y. Gregory‐Evans, Kevin Gregory‐Evans

Bibliographic record

VenueTissue Engineering Part C Methods · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEmbryoid bodyEmbryonic stem cellCell biologyRetinalCell cultureBiologyCellStem cellChemistryBiochemistryGeneticsAdult stem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We proposed to optimize the retinal differentiation protocols for human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) by improving cell handling. To improve efficiency, we first focused on the production of just one retinal precursor cell type (photoreceptor precursor cells [PPCs]) rather than the production of a range of retinal cells. Combining information from a number of previous studies, in particular the use of a feeder-free culture medium and taurine plus triiodothyronine supplements, we then assessed the values of using size-controlled embryoid bodies (EBs) and negative cell selection (to remove residual embryonic antigen-4-positive hESCs). Using size-controlled 1000 cell EBs, significant improvements were made, in that 78% CRX+ve PPCs could be produced in just 17 days. This could be increased to 93% PPCs through the added step of negative cell selection. Improved efficiency of PPC production will help in efforts to undertake shorter and larger preclinical studies as a prelude to future clinical trials.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.013
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 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

Citations23
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTissue Engineering Part C MethodsSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207