MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154851120 · doi:10.1155/2013/352315

Revascularization of Transplanted Pancreatic Islets and Role of the Transplantation Site

2013· review· en· W2154851120 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew R. Pepper, Boris Gala-López, Oliver J. Ziff, A. M. James Shapiro

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and Developmental Immunology · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsAlberta InnovatesUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevascularizationIsletMedicineTransplantationPancreatic isletsIslet cell transplantationIntensive care medicineInternal medicineCardiologySurgeryInsulinMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the initial reporting of the successful reversal of hyperglycemia through the transplantation of pancreatic islets, significant research efforts have been conducted in elucidating the process of revascularization and the influence of engraftment site on graft function and survival. During the isolation process the intrinsic islet vascular networks are destroyed, leading to impaired revascularization after transplant. As a result, in some cases a significant quantity of the beta cell mass transplanted dies acutely following the infusion into the portal vein, the most clinically used site of engraftment. Subsequently, despite the majority of patients achieving insulin independence after transplant, a proportion of them recommence small, supplemental exogenous insulin over time. Herein, this review considers the process of islet revascularization after transplant, its limiting factors, and potential strategies to improve this critical step. Furthermore, we provide a characterization of alternative transplant sites, analyzing the historical evolution and their role towards advancing transplant outcomes in both the experimental and clinical settings.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.275 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations154
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and Developmental ImmunologySame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207