MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2756058590 · doi:10.1186/s41205-017-0018-z

Development of a 3D printed device to support long term intestinal culture as an alternative to hyperoxic chamber methods

2017· article· en· W2756058590 on OpenAlexafffund
Matheus O. Costa, Roman Nosach, John C. S. Harding

Bibliographic record

Venue3D Printing in Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersAlberta Livestock and Meat AgencyGenome Canada
KeywordsExplant cultureTissue cultureOrgan cultureIn vitroBiologyMicrobiologyPathologyBiomedical engineeringAndrologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Most interactions between pathogenic microorganisms and their target host occur on mucosal surfaces of internal organs such as the intestine. In vitro organ culture (IVOC) provides an unique tool for studying host-pathogen interactions in a controlled environment. However, this technique requires a complex laboratory setup and specialized apparatus. In addition, issues arise when anaerobic pathogens are exposed to the hyperoxic environment required for intestinal culture. The objective of this study was to develop an accessible 3D-printed device that would allow manipulation of the gas mixture used to supply the tissue culture media separately from the gas mixture exposed to the mucosal side of explants. RESULTS: = 20) and cultured for 0h, 8h, 18h and 24h using the device. After the culture period, explants were fixed in formalin and H&E stained sections were evaluated for histological defects of the mucosa. At 8h, 66% of samples displayed no histological abnormalities, whereas samples collected at 18h and 24h displayed progressively increasing rates of superficial epithelial erosion and epithelial metaplasia. CONCLUSIONS: The 3D-design reported here allows investigators to setup intestinal culture explants while manipulating the gas media explants are exposed to, to support tissue viability for a minimal of 8h. The amount of media necessary and tissue contamination are potential issues associated with this apparatus.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.350 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue3D Printing in MedicineSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207