MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772306649 · doi:10.1039/c7nr08360b

Technical challenges of working with extracellular vesicles

2017· review· en· W2772306649 on OpenAlexaff
Marcel I. Ramirez, María Galli de Amorim, Catarina Gadelha, Ivana Milic, Joshua A Welsh, Vanessa M. Freitas, Muhammad Nawaz, Naveed Akbar, Yvonne Couch, Laura Makin, Fiona G. M. Cooke, André L. Vettore, Patricia X. Batista, Roberta Cordeiro Freezor, Julia Alejandra Pezuk, Lívia Rosa-Fernandes, Ana Cláudia Oliveira Carreira, Andrew Devitt, Laura A. Jacobs, Israel Tojal da Silva, Gillian Coakley, Diana Noronha Nunes, Dave Carter, Giuseppe Palmisano, Emmanuel Dias‐Neto

Bibliographic record

VenueNanoscale · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicExtracellular vesicles in disease
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMinistero della SaluteCiência sem FronteirasFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorMedical Research CouncilBritish CouncilConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoNewton Fund
KeywordsExtracellular vesiclesVesicleNanotechnologyExtracellularBiophysicsMaterials scienceChemistryCell biologyBiologyBiochemistryMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extracellular Vesicles (EVs) are gaining interest as central players in liquid biopsies, with potential applications in diagnosis, prognosis and therapeutic guidance in most pathological conditions. These nanosized particles transmit signals determined by their protein, lipid, nucleic acid and sugar content, and the unique molecular pattern of EVs dictates the type of signal to be transmitted to recipient cells. However, their small sizes and the limited quantities that can usually be obtained from patient-derived samples pose a number of challenges to their isolation, study and characterization. These challenges and some possible options to overcome them are discussed in this review.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.087
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations517
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanoscaleSame topicExtracellular vesicles in diseaseFrench-language works237,207