MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963850301 · doi:10.1111/andr.12680

Testicular organoids to study cell–cell interactions in the mammalian testis

2019· review· en· W2963850301 on OpenAlexaff
Sadman Sakib, Taylor Goldsmith, Anna Voigt, Ina Dobrinski

Bibliographic record

VenueAndrology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSperm and Testicular Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersOffice of Research Infrastructure Programs, National Institutes of HealthEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentCenters for Disease Control and PreventionNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsOrganoidBiologyCellCell biologyStem cellGerm cellIn vivoCell typeNicheComputational biologyGeneticsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Over the last ten years, three-dimensional organoid culture has garnered renewed interest, as organoids generated from primary cells or stem cells with cell associations and functions similar to organs in vivo can be a powerful tool to study tissue-specific cell-cell interactions in vitro. Very recently, a few interesting approaches have been put forth for generating testicular organoids for studying the germ cell niche microenvironment. AIM: To review different model systems that have been employed to study germ cell biology and testicular cell-cell interactions and discuss how the organoid approach can address some of the shortcomings of those systems. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Testicular organoids that bear architectural and functional similarities to their in vivo counterparts are a powerful model system to study cell-cell interactions in the germ cell niche. Organoids enable studying samples in humans and other large animals where in vivo experiments are not possible, allow modeling of testicular disease and malignancies and may provide a platform to design more precise therapeutic interventions.

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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations29
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAndrologySame topicSperm and Testicular FunctionFrench-language works237,207