MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127596557 · doi:10.1016/j.xpro.2021.100311

Isolation and characterization of circulating pro-vascular progenitor cell subsets from human whole blood samples

2021· article· en· W3127596557 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniella C. Terenzi, Ehab Bakbak, Justin Z. Trac, Mohammad Al-Omran, Adrian Quan, Hwee Teoh, Subodh Verma, David A. Hess

Bibliographic record

VenueSTAR Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAngiogenesis and VEGF in Cancer
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of TorontoRobarts Clinical TrialsSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchServierBoehringer IngelheimMerckBayerAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsProgenitor cellFlow cytometryAldehyde dehydrogenaseProgenitorBiologyCellStem cellEndothelial progenitor cellImmunologyCell biologyBiochemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The examination of circulating pro-vascular progenitor cell frequency and function is integral in understanding aberrant blood vessel homeostasis in individuals with cardiometabolic disease. Here, we outline the characterization of progenitor cell subsets from peripheral blood using high aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) activity, an intracellular detoxification enzyme previously associated with pro-vascular progenitor cell status. Using this protocol, cells can be examined by flow cytometry for ALDH activity and lineage restricted cell surface markers simultaneously. For complete details on the use and execution of this protocol, please refer to Terenzi et al. (2019) and Hess et al. (2019, 2020).

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSTAR ProtocolsSame topicAngiogenesis and VEGF in CancerFrench-language works237,207