Injectable, High Modulus, And Fatigue Resistant Composite Scaffold for Load-Bearing Soft Tissue Regeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High modulus, two-phase, bicontinuous scaffolds were prepared by photocross-linking an aqueous suspension of chondrocytes and N-methacrylate glycol chitosan with a hydrolyzable, hydrophobic, acrylated star-copolymer. Two acrylated star-copolymers were examined: poly(ε-caprolactone-co-d,l-lactide) (5446DLLACL) and poly(ε-caprolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate) (7030TMCCL). The scaffolds were assessed for injectability, two-phase interconnectivity, fatigue resistance, and long-term static culture behavior. The 7030TMCCL scaffolds demonstrated decreased moduli of 17% after 1 × 10(6) cycles at 30% strain and 5% after 56 days in culture, compared to the 5446DLLACL scaffolds, which exhibited decreases of 58 and 68%, respectively. The 7030TMCCL scaffolds accumulated more extracellular matrix after 56 days of culture (GAG: 20.1 ± 1, collagen: 35.5 ± 1.8 μg) compared to 5446DLLACL scaffolds (GAG: 13.2 ± 0.6, collagen: 6.2 ± 3.4 μg). Overall, the 7030TMCCL-based scaffolds were shown to be better suited for use as a load bearing soft tissue scaffold.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".