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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: The number of adults with osteoarthritis in the United States is expected to nearly double from 21.4 million in 2005 to 41.1 million by 2030. As a result, medical costs and associated comorbidity will exponentially increase in the coming decades. In the past decade, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have emerged as a novel treatment for degenerative joint disease. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed (from 1990 to 2013) was searched to identify relevant studies. Reference lists of included studies were also reviewed. STUDY DESIGN: Clinical review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3. RESULTS: We identified 9 animal and 7 human studies investigating the use of MSCs in the treatment of osteoarthritis, with varying levels of support for this therapy. CONCLUSION: While MSCs have shown potential for improving function and decreasing inflammation in animal studies, translation to patients is still in question. There is a great deal of heterogeneity in treatment methods. Standardizing the manufacturing and characterization of MSCs will allow for better comparisons.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it