MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306385491 · doi:10.3390/ijms232012319

Tissue Engineering in Gynecology

2022· review· en· W4306385491 on OpenAlexafffund
David Brownell, Stéphane Chabaud, Stéphane Bolduc

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsInfertilityMedicineDysfunctional uterine bleedingUterusGynecologyIntensive care medicineSexual functionObstetricsPregnancyBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Female gynecological organ dysfunction can cause infertility and psychological distress, decreasing the quality of life of affected women. Incidence is constantly increasing due to growing rates of cancer and increase of childbearing age in the developed world. Current treatments are often unable to restore organ function, and occasionally are the cause of female infertility. Alternative treatment options are currently being developed in order to face the inadequacy of current practices. In this review, pathologies and current treatments of gynecological organs (ovaries, uterus, and vagina) are described. State-of-the-art of tissue engineering alternatives to common practices are evaluated with a focus on in vivo models. Tissue engineering is an ever-expanding field, integrating various domains of modern science to create sophisticated tissue substitutes in the hope of repairing or replacing dysfunctional organs using autologous cells. Its application to gynecology has the potential of restoring female fertility and sexual wellbeing.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations26
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Molecular SciencesSame topicTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineFrench-language works237,207