MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166595819 · doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfh270

Functional Innervation in Tissue Engineered Models for In Vitro Study and Testing Purposes

2004· article· en· W2166595819 on OpenAlexafffund
Erik J. Suuronen

Bibliographic record

VenueToxicological Sciences · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSantenHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsTissue engineeringNervous tissueTransplantationEpitheliumCell biologyRegeneration (biology)NeuroscienceCorneaBiologyPathologyBiomedical engineeringAnatomyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The biotechnology industry is rapidly expanding and the emerging field of tissue engineering is projected to have a high impact in the near future. Recently the field of cellular, drug, and prosthetic delivery has melded with the field of tissue engineering to make simulated tissues. In addition to their roles as tissue substitutes for transplantation, these simulated tissues may provide more accurate models and environments for toxicology testing and the study of peripheral nerves. The current study demonstrates the importance of innervation, in general, for the function of engineered tissues. We observe that the presence of nerves in a tissue engineered (TE) human cornea model enhances the growth of the epithelium and the formation of its protective mucin layer. Innervation also confers protection to the epithelium from chemical insult, as determined by the level of post-treatment epithelial cell death. We demonstrate differential responses of the nerves to chemical stimuli by changes in intracellular sodium as measured by 2-photon microscopy. The 2-photon imaging techniques also allow for the visualization and study of the fine sensory axon fibers within the 3-dimensional tissue. This work demonstrates a role for innervation in the protective quality and function of the engineered tissue, and the potential to use the nerves themselves as indicators of the severity of an insult. These results are important to consider for the development of any optimized TE models for in vitro study and testing purposes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.110 · 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

Citations51
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToxicological SciencesSame topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207