MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981263933 · doi:10.4103/1673-5374.266907

Extracellular matrix and biomimetic engineering microenvironment for neuronal differentiation

2019· review· en· W2981263933 on OpenAlexaff
Evelyn K. F. Yim, Deepak Jain, Sabrina Mattiassi, EyleenL.K. Goh

Bibliographic record

VenueNeural Regeneration Research · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular Mechanics and Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtracellular matrixNeuroscienceRegeneration (biology)Cellular differentiationBiologyCell biologyNervous systemStem cellCentral nervous systemExtracellularChemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extracellular matrix (ECM) influences cell differentiation through its structural and biochemical properties. In nervous system, neuronal behavior is influenced by these ECMs structures which are present in a meshwork, fibrous, or tubular forms encompassing specific molecular compositions. In addition to contact guidance, ECM composition and structures also exert its effect on neuronal differentiation. This short report reviewed the native ECM structure and composition in central nervous system and peripheral nervous system, and their impact on neural regeneration and neuronal differentiation. Using topographies, stem cells have been differentiated to neurons. Further, focussing on engineered biomimicking topographies, we highlighted the role of anisotropic topographies in stem cell differentiation to neurons and its recent temporal application for efficient neuronal differentiation.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations72
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeural Regeneration ResearchSame topicCellular Mechanics and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207