MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888692546 · doi:10.15562/gnc.60

Dental Tissue-Derived Stem Cells as a Candidate for Neural Regeneration

2017· article· en· W2888692546 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samira Malekzadeh, Mohammad Amin Edalatmanesh, Davood Mehrabani, Mehrdad Shariati, Sima Malekzadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Genes and Cells · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMesenchymal stem cell research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStem cellRegeneration (biology)Neural stem cellMesenchymal stem cellProgenitor cellAdult stem cellBiologyNeuroscienceMedicinePathologyCell biologyEndothelial stem cellIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, stem cell therapy tried to improve the life of patients that suffer from neurodegenerative disease, like Alzheimer's disease. Although teeth are non-essential for life, but the dental tissues are an important source of mesenchymal stem cells that are suitable for neural regeneration. The studies showed that dental stem cells (DSCs) have the potential to differentiate into several cell types that among the most important is neural progenitor. In this review article, discusses the types of dental stem cells and then focused on application of dental stem cells on neural regeneration.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Genes and CellsSame topicMesenchymal stem cell researchFrench-language works237,207