MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132963896 · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmg001

Stem cells: you can't tell a cell by its cover

2003· review· en· W2132963896 on OpenAlexaff
Ian M. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Reproduction Update · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStem cellHaematopoiesisAdult stem cellCell biologyBiologyEmbryonic stem cellCord bloodClinical uses of mesenchymal stem cellsMultipotent Stem CellBone marrowImmunologyStem cell transplantation for articular cartilage repairProgenitor cellGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embryonic stem (ES) cells are capable of unlimited self-renewal and have the ability to give rise to all tissue types in the body. The use of human ES cells for tissue and cell therapeutics has been suggested, but is limited by ethical concerns as these cells are derived from the inner cell mass of human embryos. In addition, the need for HLA matching of ES cell-derived tissues for allogeneic transplantation would require a bank of several thousand ES cell lines to make tissue therapeutics practical. Recently, adult stem cells-of which those in bone marrow are the best studied-have been shown to be capable of multilineage differentiation into cells of various non-blood tissues. Umbilical cord blood (UCB) haematopoietic stem cells have been shown to be equivalent to bone marrow stem cells for reconstitution of the haematopoietic system. Preliminary studies have also demonstrated that UCB haematopoietic stem cells are multipotent and capable of differentiating into non-blood cell types. This observation raises the exciting possibility of replacing human ES cells for tissue and cell therapeutics with UCB blood haematopoietic stem cells that are normally discarded with the placenta after delivery.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.010

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations13
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Reproduction UpdateSame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207