MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315640833 · doi:10.3389/fcvm.2022.981982

Cardiac regeneration: Options for repairing the injured heart

2023· review· en· W4315640833 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Wang, Meilin An, Bernhard J. Haubner, Josef Penninger

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInduced pluripotent stem cellRegenerative medicineRegeneration (biology)MedicineNeuroscienceTransplantationStem cellBioinformaticsEmbryonic stem cellBiologyCell biologyInternal medicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac regeneration is one of the grand challenges in repairing injured human hearts. Numerous studies of signaling pathways and metabolism on cardiac development and disease pave the way for endogenous cardiomyocyte regeneration. New drug delivery approaches, high-throughput screening, as well as novel therapeutic compounds combined with gene editing will facilitate the development of potential cell-free therapeutics. In parallel, progress has been made in the field of cell-based therapies. Transplantation of human pluripotent stem cell (hPSC)-derived cardiomyocytes (hPSC-CMs) can partially rescue the myocardial defects caused by cardiomyocyte loss in large animals. In this review, we summarize current cell-based and cell-free regenerative therapies, discuss the importance of cardiomyocyte maturation in cardiac regenerative medicine, and envision new ways of regeneration for the injured heart.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations23
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cardiovascular MedicineSame topicTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineFrench-language works237,207