MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061927242 · doi:10.1002/mus.21895

Comparison of beneficial effects of undifferentiated cultured bone marrow stromal cells and omental adipose‐derived nucleated cell fractions on sciatic nerve regeneration

2010· article· en· W2061927242 on OpenAlexaff
Rahim Mohammadi, Saeed Azizi, Nowruz Delirezh, Rahim Hobbenaghi, Keyvan Amini

Bibliographic record

VenueMuscle & Nerve · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMesenchymal stem cell research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStromal cellRegeneration (biology)Sciatic nerveAdipose tissueBone marrowMedicinePathologyStromal vascular fractionAnatomyChemistryCell biologyBiologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adipose tissue is a good source for isolation of cells with stem-cell-like properties. The effects of undifferentiated cultured bone marrow stromal cells (BMSCs) and omental adipose-derived nucleated cells (OADNCs) on peripheral nerve regeneration were compared in a rat nerve regeneration model. A 10-mm sciatic nerve defect was bridged using a vein graft. In one group, the vein was filled with BMSCs and in the other group with OADNCs. Functional study, morphometric indices, and immunohistochemistry indicated there was no significant difference (P > 0.05) between groups in recovery of regenerated axons at 4, 8, and 12 weeks after surgery. OADNCs enhanced regeneration similar to undifferentiated BMSCs. These observations suggest OADNCs represent an effective and cost-saving cell population due to the shortened time interval from tissue collection to cell injection as well as procedural simplicity. This approach is clinically translatable toward new methods for enhanced peripheral nerve repair without the limitations of BMSC.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.293
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 designObservational
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

Citations52
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMuscle & NerveSame topicMesenchymal stem cell researchFrench-language works237,207