Microfluidic systems for stem cell-based neural tissue engineering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neural tissue engineering aims at developing novel approaches for the treatment of diseases of the nervous system, by providing a permissive environment for the growth and differentiation of neural cells. Three-dimensional (3D) cell culture systems provide a closer biomimetic environment, and promote better cell differentiation and improved cell function, than could be achieved by conventional two-dimensional (2D) culture systems. With the recent advances in the discovery and introduction of different types of stem cells for tissue engineering, microfluidic platforms have provided an improved microenvironment for the 3D-culture of stem cells. Microfluidic systems can provide more precise control over the spatiotemporal distribution of chemical and physical cues at the cellular level compared to traditional systems. Various microsystems have been designed and fabricated for the purpose of neural tissue engineering. Enhanced neural migration and differentiation, and monitoring of these processes, as well as understanding the behavior of stem cells and their microenvironment have been obtained through application of different microfluidic-based stem cell culture and tissue engineering techniques. As the technology advances it may be possible to construct a "brain-on-a-chip". In this review, we describe the basics of stem cells and tissue engineering as well as microfluidics-based tissue engineering approaches. We review recent testing of various microfluidic approaches for stem cell-based neural tissue engineering.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".