MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955407204 · doi:10.1186/s13036-019-0185-0

Cardiac tissue engineering: state-of-the-art methods and outlook

2019· review· en· W2955407204 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Engineering · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTissue engineeringScaffoldComputer scienceProcess (computing)Genome editingConstruct (python library)Computational biologyArtificial intelligenceGenomeNanotechnologyBiologyBiomedical engineeringGeneEngineeringMaterials scienceGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this review is to assess the state-of-the-art fabrication methods, advances in genome editing, and the use of machine learning to shape the prospective growth in cardiac tissue engineering. Those interdisciplinary emerging innovations would move forward basic research in this field and their clinical applications. The long-entrenched challenges in this field could be addressed by novel 3-dimensional (3D) scaffold substrates for cardiomyocyte (CM) growth and maturation. Stem cell-based therapy through genome editing techniques can repair gene mutation, control better maturation of CMs or even reveal its molecular clock. Finally, machine learning and precision control for improvements of the construct fabrication process and optimization in tissue-specific clonal selections with an outlook of cardiac tissue engineering are also presented.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.313 · 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