MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035344943 · doi:10.1039/c4tb00570h

Polydopamine-coated paper-stack nanofibrous membranes enhancing adipose stem cells' adhesion and osteogenic differentiation

2014· article· en· W2035344943 on OpenAlexaff
Liangpeng Ge, Qingtao Li, Yong Huang, Songquan Yang, Jun Ouyang, Shoushan Bu, Wen Zhong, Zuohua Liu, Malcolm Xing

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Materials Chemistry B · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceNanofiberCoatingMembraneAdhesionScaffoldTissue engineeringGelatinStack (abstract data type)NanotechnologyCell adhesionLayer (electronics)Surface modificationBiomedical engineeringChemical engineeringComposite materialChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the fabrication of 3-D complex tissues for implantation, layer-by-layer (LBL) electrospun nanofibrous scaffolds have recently received intensive interest. However, poor cell adhesion and cell expansion between the layers in an LBL stack remain important issues. In this study, we report a mussel-inspired, biomimetic approach to functionalize the surface of PCL/gelatin nanofibrous membranes coated with poly (dopamine) (PDA). Our study demonstrates that a PDA coating on electrospun PCL/gelatin nanofibers leads to a significant change in their surface properties and a higher adhesion force. Furthermore, we found that PDA coating promotes the adhesion and growth of adipose stem cells (ADSCs). In 3-D LBL stacked scaffolds, more cells survived in a PAD-coated scaffold than in a non-coated one. The PDA coating was further demonstrated to promote the osteogenic differentiation of ADSCs in LBL paper-stacking membranes. Our study suggests that PDA-coated paper-stacking nanofiber membranes present a facile and economic method for the development of 3D tissue engineering.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.780

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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.

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

Citations74
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Materials Chemistry BSame topicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207