MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026126957 · doi:10.1080/15287394.2011.570230

Effects of Whole Cigarette Smoke on Human Gingival Fibroblast Adhesion, Growth, and Migration

2011· article· en· W2026126957 on OpenAlexaff
Abdelhabib Semlali, Jamila Chakir, Mahmoud Rouabhia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental Health · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibroblastCigarette smokeAdhesionChemistryCell adhesionCell growthCellIntegrinWound healingOral mucosaSmokeCell migrationAndrologyImmunologyIn vitroMedicineBiologyPathologyBiochemistryToxicology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of a single exposure to whole cigarette smoke on human gingival fibroblast behavior. Normal oral mucosa fibroblasts were exposed once to whole cigarette smoke for 5, 15, or 30 min, and then were used to analyze cell adhesion, β1-integrin expression, cell growth and viability, cell capacity to contract collagen gel, and cell migration following wound infliction. Our findings showed that when gingival fibroblasts were exposed once to whole cigarette smoke, this resulted in a significant inhibition of cell adhesion, a decrease in the number of β1-integrin-positive cells, increased LDH activity in the target cells, and reduced growth. The smoke-exposed fibroblasts were also not able to contract collagen gel matrix and migrate following insult. Overall results demonstrate that a single exposure to whole cigarette smoke produced significant morphological and functional deregulation in gingival fibroblasts. This may explain the higher predisposition of tobacco users to oral infections and diseases such as cancer.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations56
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Toxicology and Environmental HealthSame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207