Human dental pulp stem cells differentiation: A review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The advent of regenerative medicine has brought us the opportunity to regenerate, modify and restore human organs function. Stem cells, a key resource in regenerative medicine, are defined as clonogenic, self-renewing, progenitor cells that can generate into one or more specialized cell types. Human dental pulp stem cells (HDPSCs) are ectodermal-derived stem cells, originating from migrating neural crest cells and are capable of providing enough cells for potential cell-based therapies. During last decade, HDPSCs have received extensive attention in the field of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine due to their accessibility and ability to differentiate in several cell phenotypes. In this review, we have described the potential of HDPSCs to differentiate into odontoblasts, osteoblasts, hepatocytes, neuroblasts and angioblasts in response to different bioactive factors. Therefore, the culture and selective differentiation of HDPSCs should provide further understanding of dental pulp progenitors and their potential use for new therapeutic approaches in regenerative medicine. Keywords: Human dental pulp stem cells (HDPSCs), Differentiation, Bioactive factors, Inductive factors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".