MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101997181 · doi:10.2174/1566523054546198

Genetic Manipulation of Human Embryonic Stem Cells: A System to Study Early Human Development and Potential Therapeutic Applications

2005· review· en· W2101997181 on OpenAlexaff
Pablo Menéndez, Li‐Sheng Wang, Mickie Bhatia

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Gene Therapy · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical Trials
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbryonic stem cellRegenerative medicineBiologyStem cellCellular differentiationComputational biologyDirected differentiationInduced pluripotent stem cellGeneGeneticsCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The successful derivation of human embryonic stem cell (hESC) lines by Thomson and colleagues [Thomson et al., 1998] provided a new area of investigation in both regenerative medicine and early human development. Fundamental study of the molecular and cellular mechanisms responsible for normal lineage development will rely on reproducible protocols to direct the differentiation of hESCs into specific lineages of interest and genetically manipulate both hESCs and their derivatives. Identifying standards for maintenance of hESCs, methods for controlled differentiation and genetic manipulation of hESCs and their derivatives will provide a foundation to explore their potential therapeutic use in cell and gene therapy. In the present review, our goal is to outline the latest advances in the field with particular focus on how hESCs and their derivatives can be genetically altered, how this may be useful in better understanding the cellular and molecular events of lineage differentiation, and how deregulation of these cellular processes may lead to abnormal development and disease.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.370
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

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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Gene TherapySame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207