MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392090722 · doi:10.1007/s10561-024-10131-6

Development and validation of cryopreserved or freeze-dried decellularized human dermis for transplantation

2024· article· en· W4392090722 on OpenAlexaff
Giulia Montagner, Antonia Barbazza, Manvi Pant, Andrea T. Lugas, Gianpaolo Serino, Cristina Bignardi, Mara Terzini, Andrea Vantini, Jacopo Stefanelli, Diletta Trojan

Bibliographic record

VenueCell and Tissue Banking · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecellularizationCryopreservationTransplant surgeryTransplantationDermisMedicineTissue bankSurgeryBiomedical engineeringPathologyBiologyTissue engineeringCell biologyHepatologyEmbryo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For decades, dermal tissue grafts have been used in various regenerative, reconstructive, and augmentative procedures across the body. To eliminate antigenicity and immunogenic response while still preserving the individual components and collective structural integrity of the extracellular matrix (ECM), dermis can be decellularized. Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) products like such are produced to accurately serve diverse clinical purposes. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the efficacy of a novel decellularization protocol of the human dermis, which eliminates residual human genetic material without compromising the biomechanical integrity and collagenous content of the tissue. Moreover, a freeze-drying protocol was validated. The results showed that though our decellularization protocol, human dermis can be decellularized obtaining a biocompatible matrix. The procedure is completely realized in GMP aseptic condition, avoiding tissue terminal sterilization.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell and Tissue BankingSame topicTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineFrench-language works237,207