MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137922604 · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-21950-6

Reply to ‘Are atrial human pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes ready to identify drugs that beat atrial fibrillation?’

2021· letter· en· W3137922604 on OpenAlexaff
Assad Shiti, Idit Goldfracht, Naim Shaheen, Stephanie Protze, Lior Gepstein

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2021
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrial fibrillationInduced pluripotent stem cellCardiologyBeat (acoustics)MedicineInternal medicineStem cellPharmacologyBiologyEmbryonic stem cellCell biologyGeneticsGenePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In our recent report 1 , we combined developmental biology-inspired differentiation strategies of human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) to derive chamber-specific cardiomyocytes 2 and a collagen-hydrogel-based tissue engineering strategy 3 to generate ring-shaped ventricular and atrial-specific engineered heart tissues (EHTs). Detailed molecular, ultrastructural, and functional phenotyping, together with targeted pharmacology, confirmed the chamber-specific identity of the atrial/ventricular EHTs, and demonstrated the potential of these models for disease modeling and drug testing applications. The latter included the ability to induce reentrant arrhythmias in the atrial EHTs and the ability to terminate such arrhythmias with established anti-arrhythmic agents (flecainide and vernakalant). In the accompanying comment, Christ et al. 4 raise concerns with regards to the relative immature properties of the chamber-specific EHTs and their different response to some of the anti-arrhythmic drugs tested (vernakalant and lidocaine) in comparison to their reported effects in adult human atrial and ventricular heart tissues.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0680.063
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.007

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.296 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207