MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985610158 · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2019.00317

Biomaterials and Scaffold Design Strategies for Regenerative Endodontic Therapy

2019· review· en· W2985610158 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicEndodontics and Root Canal Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsBiomaterialRegenerative medicineEndodontic therapyScaffoldTissue engineeringPulp (tooth)DentistryRegeneration (biology)Stem cellMedicineBiomedical engineeringRoot canalBiologyCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Challenges with traditional endodontic treatment for immature permanent teeth exhibiting pulp necrosis have prompted interest in tissue engineering approaches to regenerate the pulp-dentin complex and allow root development to continue. These procedures are known as regenerative endodontic therapies. A fundamental component of the regenerative endodontic process is the presence of a scaffold for stem cells from the apical papilla to adhere to, multiply and differentiate. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the biomaterial scaffolds that have been investigated to support stem cells from the apical papilla in regenerative endodontic therapy and to identify potential biomaterials for future research. An electronic search was conducted using Pubmed and Novanet databases for published studies on biomaterial scaffolds for regenerative endodontic therapies, as well as promising biomaterial candidates for future research. Using keywords "regenerative endodontics," "scaffold," "stem cells" and "apical papilla," 203 articles were identified after duplicate articles were removed. A second search using "dental pulp stem cells" instead of "apical papilla" yielded 244 articles. Inclusion criteria included the use of stem cells from the apical papilla or dental pulp stem cells in combination with a biomaterial scaffold; articles using other dental stem cells or no scaffolds were excluded. The investigated scaffolds were organized in host-derived, naturally-derived and synthetic material categories. It was found that the biomaterial scaffolds investigated to date possess both desirable characteristics and issues that limit their clinical applications. Future research investigating the scaffolds presented in this article may, ultimately, point to a protocol for a consistent, clinically-successful regenerative endodontic therapy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.244 · 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