MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161794048 · doi:10.3109/03008200009005290

Molecular and Cell Biology of Skin Wound Healing in a Pig Model

2000· article· en· W2161794048 on OpenAlexaff
Jian Fei Wang, Carolyn R. Reno, William M. Kulyk, J. Barry Wright, David A. Hart

Bibliographic record

VenueConnective Tissue Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsResearch CanadaUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWound healingCell biologyBiologyCellComputational biologyImmunologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To define the pattern of change at the molecular and cellular levels during the healing of excisional skin wounds in the skeletally immature pig, mRNA levels for relevant molecules were assessed by semiquantitative RT-PCR using porcine specific primer sets and RNA isolated from normal skin and samples at various time post-wounding. Analysis of cellular change was assessed by DNA quantification and histology of tissue sections. The results demonstrated that the changes in the pattern of RNA and DNA content of the scar tissue were consistent with the observed increasing cellularity. The mRNA levels for collagen I, III, HSP47, IL-1, TGF-beta, MMP-1, -2 and -9, TIMP-1, -2, and-4, PAI-1, versican were significantly elevated during healing; levels for biglycan and fibromodulin were not significantly altered; and the mRNA levels for TIMP-3 were depressed. These findings suggest that skin wound healing is a series of complex matrix-cell interactions that involve cellular migration and inflammation, followed by proliferation of fibroblasts with new collagen synthesis, and lastly tissue remodeling of the scar.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 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

Citations111
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConnective Tissue ResearchSame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207