MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2280833244 · doi:10.1002/jbmr.2816

Small Players Ruling the Hard Game: siRNA in Bone Regeneration

2016· review· en· W2280833244 on OpenAlexaff
Saber Ghadakzadeh, Mina Mekhail, Ahmed Aoude, Reggie C. Hamdy, Maryam Tabrizian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Interference and Gene Delivery
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegeneration (biology)Small interfering RNAGene silencingMedicineBioinformaticsBiologyRNACell biologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silencing gene expression through a sequence-specific manner can be achieved by small interfering RNAs (siRNAs). The discovery of this process has opened the doors to the development of siRNA therapeutics. Although several preclinical and clinical studies have shown great promise in the treatment of neurological disorders, cancers, dominant disorders, and viral infections with siRNA, siRNA therapy is still gaining ground in musculoskeletal tissue repair and bone regeneration. Here we present a comprehensive review of the literature to summarize different siRNA delivery strategies utilized to enhance bone regeneration. With advancement in understanding the targetable biological pathways involved in bone regeneration and also the rapid progress in siRNA technologies, application of siRNA for bone regeneration has great therapeutic potential. High rates of musculoskeletal injuries and diseases, and their inevitable consequences, impose a huge financial burden on individuals and healthcare systems worldwide.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations27
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Mineral ResearchSame topicRNA Interference and Gene DeliveryFrench-language works237,207