MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033636131 · doi:10.1089/cell.2010.0108

Toward Transgene-Free Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells: Lessons from Transdifferentiation Studies

2011· article· en· W2033636131 on OpenAlexaff
Shawn Chua, Robert F. Casper, Ian M. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueCellular Reprogramming · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReprogrammingTransdifferentiationBiologyInduced pluripotent stem cellRegenerative medicineSomatic cellTransgeneStem cellCell biologyComputational biologyEmbryonic stem cellGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Regenerative medicine has received much attention over the years due to its clinical and commercial potential. The excitement around regenerative medicine waxes and wanes as new discoveries add to its foundation but are not immediately clinically applicable. The recent discovery of induced pluripotent stem cells has lead to a sustained effort from many research groups to develop clinically relevant regenerative medicine therapies. A major focus of cellular reprogramming is to generate safe cellular products through the use of proteins or small molecules instead of transgenes. The successful reprogramming of somatic nuclei to generate pluripotential cells capable of embryo development was pioneered over 50 years ago by Briggs and King and followed by Gurdon in the early 1960s. The success of these studies, the cloning of Dolly, and more current studies involving adult stem cells and transdifferentiation provide us with a large repository of potential candidate molecules and experimental systems that will assist in the generation of safe, transgene-free pluripotential 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.165 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCellular ReprogrammingSame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207