MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886269413 · doi:10.1002/jsp2.1030

Latest advances in intervertebral disc development and progenitor cells

2018· review· en· W2886269413 on OpenAlexafffund
Cheryle A. Séguin, Danny Chan, Chitra Lekha Dahia, Zulma Gazit

Bibliographic record

VenueJOR Spine · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsIntervertebral discProgenitor cellNeuroscienceBiologyFunction (biology)Cell biologyStem cellMedicineBioinformaticsAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is a concise review aiming to assemble the most relevant topics presented by the authors at ORS‐Philadelphia Spine Research Society Fourth International Spine Research Symposium. It centers on the latest advances in disc development, its main structural entities, and the populating cells, with emphasis on the advances in pivotal molecular pathways responsible for forming the intervertebral discs (IVD). The objective of finding and emphasizing pathways and mechanisms that function to control tissue formation is to identify and to explore modifications occurring during normal aging, disease, and tissue repair. Thus, to comprehend that the cellular and molecular basis of tissue degeneration are crucial in the study of the dynamic interplay that includes cell‐cell communication, gene regulation, and growth factors required to form a healthy and functional tissue during normal development.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations27
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJOR SpineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207