A structured evaluation of cryopreservation in generating single-cell transcriptomes from cerebrospinal fluid
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Single-cell transcriptomics allows characterization of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cells at an unprecedented level. Here, we report a robust cryopreservation protocol adapted for the characterization of fragile CSF cells by single-cell RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) in moderate- to large-scale studies. Fresh CSF was collected from twenty-one participants at two independent sites. Each CSF sample was split into two fractions: one was processed fresh, while the second was cryopreserved for months and profiled after thawing. B and T cell receptor sequencing was also performed. Our comparison of fresh and cryopreserved data from the same individuals demonstrates highly efficient recovery of all known CSF cell types. We find no significant difference in cell type proportions and cellular transcriptomes between fresh and cryopreserved cells. Results were comparable at both sites and with different single-cell sequencing chemistries. Cryopreservation did not affect recovery of T and B cell clonotype diversity. Our CSF cell cryopreservation protocol provides an important alternative to fresh processing of fragile CSF cells.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it