MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206989374 · doi:10.1002/adhm.202101389

Natural Biomaterials from Biodiversity for Healthcare Applications

2021· review· en· W3206989374 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Healthcare Materials · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBone Tissue Engineering Materials
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural (archaeology)BiodiversitySophisticationHealth careNanotechnologyMaterials scienceEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural biomaterials originating during the growth cycles of all living organisms have been used for many applications. They span from bioinert to bioactive materials including bioinspired ones. As they exhibit an increasing degree of sophistication, natural biomaterials have proven suitable to address the needs of the healthcare sector. Here the different natural healthcare biomaterials, their biodiversity sources, properties, and promising healthcare applications are reviewed. The variability of their properties as a result of considered species and their habitat is also discussed. Finally, some limitations of natural biomaterials are discussed and possible future developments are provided as more natural biomaterials are yet to be discovered and studied.

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 score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.288 · 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