MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2390548476

Islet cells Transplantation in the Treatment of Type I Diabetes:Present and Future

2009· article· en· W2390548476 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
L Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Philosophy(Clinical Decision Making Forum Edition) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransplantationIsletMedicineUmbilical Cord Blood TransplantationType 1 diabetesReprogrammingIslet cell transplantationStem cellUmbilical cordEconomic shortageDiabetes mellitusImmunologyIntensive care medicineBiologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyHematopoietic stem cell transplantationCell biologyCell
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the Edmonton protocol of pancreatic islet transplantation was reported to be used successfully in 7 type Ⅰ diabetic patients in 2000,more and more work has been done in the field of islet transplantation around the world.However,the success of clinical transplantation is limited by two major factors.First,islet transplantation is presently hampered by the shortage of organ donors.Second,the immunosuppressive regimen required may have adverse effects on graft viability.Recently,scientists are exploring new ways for islets transplantation.Especially,reprogramming inducible stem cells (iPS),regulatory T cells,umbilical cord blood stem cells and a variety of new technologies has gained initial success,and will provide us with more options.Here we reviewed the present status of islet cells transplantation in the treatment of type Ⅰ diabetes and the future prospects.

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)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Philosophy(Clinical Decision Making Forum Edition)→Same topicPancreatic function and diabetes→French-language works237,207→