MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038083954 · doi:10.1002/jbm.10243

Effects of substratum surface topography on the organization of cells and collagen fibers in collagen gel cultures

2002· article· en· W2038083954 on OpenAlexaff
Jeannette Glass-Brudzinski, David Perizzolo, D. M. Brunette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceBiomaterialComposite materialBiomedical engineeringBiophysicsNanotechnologyMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the orientation of fibroblasts and collagen cultured on microfabricated grooved or smooth titanium surfaces, as well as on tissue culture polystyrene, in the presence or absence of collagen gels. The gels were first added either to the confluent fibroblast culture on the surface (cell-gel condition) or to the fibroblasts were suspended within the collagen gel and then placed onto the surface (gel condition). Cells and collagen were observed with differential interference, polarization, and confocal laser scanning microscopy. Although the smooth surfaces had no effect on cell orientation in the gel for the first 2 weeks of culture, cells did orient with grooves regardless of the culture conditions. There was evidence for orthogonal multilayering of cells under the cell-gel condition at 4 weeks, and collagen alignment reflected cell alignment. The interaction of the collagen gel with the surface depended on whether the cell-gel or the gel condition was employed. In the former condition, the gel contracted toward the substratum, whereas the gel condition resulted in the formation of a ring of collagen loosely attached to the substratum. These results suggest that the order in which fibroblasts encounter substratum and extracellular matrix can influence the eventual matrix-cell interactions, and that substratum topography can influence matrix and cell orientation in zones not immediately in contact with the surface.

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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations65
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Materials ResearchSame topicBone Tissue Engineering MaterialsFrench-language works237,207