MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035225321 · doi:10.1159/000324244

Osteopontin and Wound Healing in Bone

2011· review· en· W2035225321 on OpenAlexafffund
Marc D. McKee, Claudio E. Pedraza, Mari T. Kaartinen

Bibliographic record

VenueCells Tissues Organs · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone and Dental Protein Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOsteopontinCell biologyPhagocytosisChemistryWound healingExtracellular matrixOsteoblastMacrophageBone healingImmunologyIn vitroPathologyBiologyAnatomyBiochemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bone wound healing after surgical drilling/cutting initially involves a typical inflammatory response with a leukocyte-rich cell infiltrate whose professional phagocytes (neutrophils and macrophages) clear the wound site of various bacterial (if present), particulate, and insoluble components arising from the original wounding event. As part of this process, in a surgical model of bone repair in rats, osteopontin (OPN) secreted by macrophages - with its known mineral-binding properties arising from abundant calcium-binding phosphorylations and overall net negative charge - binds to the newly exposed mineralized surfaces of particulate bone debris and the osseous wound margins created by the drilling, as shown by high-resolution immunogold labeling and transmission electron microscopy. For bone debris powder, OPN serves as an opsonin for clearance by macrophage phagocytosis, as demonstrated in vitro by phagocytosis assays using cultured J774.A1 murine macrophages and OPN-coated microbeads. Macrophage-secreted OPN binding to the bone wound margins contributes to cement line (plane) formation with subsequent OPN additions to the cement line coming from osteoblast lineage cells arriving at this site to effect bone repair upon further osteoblast differentiation, and extracellular matrix deposition and mineralization. Such interfacial OPN is thought to contribute to the cell adhesion, cell signaling, and matrix mineralization events required to effectively integrate the new bone into the preexisting bone at the margins of the drill site.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations106
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCells Tissues OrgansSame topicBone and Dental Protein StudiesFrench-language works237,207