MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090613458 · doi:10.1002/jbm.10217

Attachment, spreading, and matrix formation by human gingival fibroblasts on porous‐structured titanium alloy and calcium polyphosphate substrates

2002· article· en· W2090613458 on OpenAlex
Tarek Y. El Sayegh, Robert M. Pilliar, Christopher A. McCulloch

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibronectinMaterials scienceExtracellular matrixTitaniumFibroblastBiophysicsChemistryBiochemistryMetallurgyIn vitroBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Porous calcium polyphosphate (CPP) structures represent promising resorbable implant systems that can promote anchorage to connective tissues. Previous studies focused on chondrocyte interactions with CPP, but there are limited data on interactions of soft connective tissue cells with these materials. We studied attachment, spreading, and matrix formation by human gingival fibroblasts when cultured on amorphous and crystalline CPP. Comparison with porous Ti6Al4V substrates of similar volume percent, porosity, and pore size distribution provided evaluations of fibroblast interactions with rapid, moderate, and nonbiodegradable systems, respectively. Cells were incubated on substrates in medium containing ascorbic acid and evaluated at 3, 24, 48, 72, and 96 h after plating. Attached cell counts, cytoplasmic actin filament area, and immunostained extracellular type 1 collagen or fibronectin were quantified by morphometric analyses using epifluorescence microscopy. Cell morphology and substrate interactions were evaluated by scanning electron microscopy. Spreading, attachment, and matrix production were similar for both CPP substrates. In contrast, titanium alloy substrates exhibited threefold more attachment and twofold more spreading than CPP substrates. The area per cell of immunostained extracellular collagen and fibronectin was similar for the three different substrates. The results indicate that the crystallinity and, hence, degradation rate of CPP substrates does not substantially affect the interactions of fibroblasts with CPP materials but that compared with titanium alloy substrates, spreading and attachment are inhibited.

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.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.287 · 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