MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787726205 · doi:10.1109/iedm.2017.8268367

Tissue microenvironment and cellular imaging

2017· article· en· W2787726205 on OpenAlexaff
S. Soroush Nasseri, Samantha M. Grist, Sunny P. Chen, Y.K. Tam, Pieter R. Cullis, Karen C. Cheung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticellular organismPenetration (warfare)MicrofluidicsBiomedical engineeringSpheroidTissue engineeringNanomedicineCellIn vivoBiological tissueNanotechnologyCell cultureMaterials scienceCell biologyChemistryNanoparticleBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small tissue constructs comprising several cell types within a three-dimensional environment can better mimic tissue, and may provide a better system to screen and validate drugs than current two-dimensional monolayer cultures. We developed a microfluidic flow-focusing method to rapidly and reproducibly create multicellular, 3-D spheroids that can better model several aspects of the tumour in vivo, including diffusion gradients of O2 and drugs. When evaluating effects of drugs on arrays of micro-tissues in high content screening, we will need to image deep within the tissues to assess parameters such as cell viability at the tissue cores or drug penetration into the tissue as a function of time. We have developed an on-chip method to rapidly clear arrays of 3-D cell cultures and micro-tissues, compatible with two-photon microscopy to track drug and nanomedicine penetration into the tissues.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207