MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149171260 · doi:10.1177/1947603511401905

Preclinical Studies for Cartilage Repair

2011· article· en· W2149171260 on OpenAlex

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

VenueCartilage · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCartilageAnimal testingMedicinePreclinical testingArticular cartilageClinical trialPathologyAnimal modelSurgeryBioinformaticsIntensive care medicineBiologyMedical physicsOsteoarthritisAnatomyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Investigational devices for articular cartilage repair or replacement are considered to be significant risk devices by regulatory bodies. Therefore animal models are needed to provide proof of efficacy and safety prior to clinical testing. The financial commitment and regulatory steps needed to bring a new technology to clinical use can be major obstacles, so the implementation of highly predictive animal models is a pressing issue. Until recently, a reductionist approach using acute chondral defects in immature laboratory species, particularly the rabbit, was considered adequate; however, if successful and timely translation from animal models to regulatory approval and clinical use is the goal, a step-wise development using laboratory animals for screening and early development work followed by larger species such as the goat, sheep and horse for late development and pivotal studies is recommended. Such animals must have fully organized and mature cartilage. Both acute and chronic chondral defects can be used but the later are more like the lesions found in patients and may be more predictive. Quantitative and qualitative outcome measures such as macroscopic appearance, histology, biochemistry, functional imaging, and biomechanical testing of cartilage, provide reliable data to support investment decisions and subsequent applications to regulatory bodies for clinical trials. No one model or species can be considered ideal for pivotal studies, but the larger animal species are recommended for pivotal studies. Larger species such as the horse, goat and pig also allow arthroscopic delivery, and press-fit or sutured implant fixation in thick cartilage as well as second look arthroscopies and biopsy procedures.

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)0.000
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 score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.223 · 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