MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142419819 · doi:10.1002/jbm.a.34712

Dynamic cell patterning of photoresponsive hyaluronic acid hydrogels

2013· article· en· W2142419819 on OpenAlexafffund
Ajoy Basak, Swapan Majumdar, Xudong Cao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSelf-healing hydrogelsHyaluronic acidMaterials scienceAdhesiveNanotechnologyTissue engineeringBiocompatible materialBiophysicsMicrocontact printingCellCell encapsulationBiomedical engineeringChemistryPolymer chemistryAnatomyBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Techniques to pattern cells on biocompatible hydrogels allow for the creation of highly controlled cell microenvironments within materials that mimic the physicochemical properties of native tissues. Such technology has the potential to further enhance our knowledge of cell biology and to play a role in the development of novel tissue engineering devices. Light is an ideal stimulus to catalyze pattern formation since it can be controlled spatially as well as temporally. Herein, we have developed and enhanced a hydrogel cell patterning strategy. It is based on photoactive caged RGDS peptides incorporated into a hyaluronic acid (HA) hydrogel, which can be subsequently activated with near-UV light to create cell-adhesive regions within an otherwise non-adhesive hydrogel. With this strategy, we have been able to pattern multiple cell populations-either in contact with one another or held apart-on an underlying chemically patterned HA hydrogel. Furthermore, the hydrogel cell pattern could be altered with time, even 2 weeks after initial seeding, to create additional adhesive regions to regulate the direction of cell growth and migration. These dynamic hydrogel cell patterns, created with a standard fluorescence microscope, were shown to be robust and lasted at least 3 weeks in vitro.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Materials Research Part ASame topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207