MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048471878 · doi:10.1002/jbm.a.32479

Polymer fibers as contact guidance to orient microvascularization in a 3D environment

2009· article· en· W2048471878 on OpenAlexaff
Irza Sukmana, Patrick Vermette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsHealth and Social Services Centre University Institute of Geriatrics of SherbrookeCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceUmbilical veinPolymerFiberFibrinHuman umbilical vein endothelial cellProcess (computing)Biomedical engineeringTissue engineeringComposite materialBiophysicsIn vitroChemistryComputer scienceBiologyBiochemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe an in vitro culture process that uses 100-microm diameter poly(ethylene terephthalate) monofilaments as contact guidance of human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) to orient the development of microvessels in a 3D environment. Untreated fibers, distanced either by 0.05, 0.1, 0.15, or 0.2 mm were first covered with HUVECs and then sandwiched between two layers of fibrin gel containing HUVECs. After 2 and 4 days of culture, cell connections and microvessels were evaluated. Cell connections formed massively along and in between adjacent fibers that were distanced by 0.05 and 0.1 mm, whereas with fibers separated by larger distances, connections were rare. After 4 days of culture, the optimum fiber-to-fiber distance to form microvessels was 0.1 mm. This study reveals that polymer fibers embedded in gel can be used as guides to direct the microvascularization process, with potential applications in cancer and cardiovascular research and 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part ASame topicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207