MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402285636 · doi:10.60087/jklst.v3.n4.p78

Blood brain barrier-on-a-chip permeation to model neurological diseases using microfluidic biosensors

2024· article· en· W4402285636 on OpenAlexaff
Praneetha Periketi, Karmanjot Kaur, Faisal Naseer Vaid, Yashaswini B.M, Meenakshi Madhu, Saloni Verma, Karan Dhingra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Knowledge Learning and Science Technology ISSN 2959-6386 (online) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaPraxis Spinal Cord Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlood–brain barrierMicrofluidic chipPermeationMicrofluidicsBiosensorNanotechnologyOrgan-on-a-chipBiomedical engineeringMedicineMaterials scienceChemistryInternal medicineCentral nervous systemMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The need to understand human body functions, monitor disease progression, and advance in drug development have consistently been major driving forces for medical innovations and advancements. Organ-on-a-Chip technology, particularly Blood-brain-barrier (BBB)-on-chip technology, creates an avenue to closely replicate the brain environment and provides real-time monitoring of cells. Located at the interface between the blood and the brain parenchyma, the blood-brain barrier is crucial for protecting the brain due to its semi-permeable nature, and is responsible for regulating the movement of molecules between the blood and the brain. Therefore its integrity and perfect functionality are essential for the unperturbed functioning of the central nervous system. The lack of effective in-vitro models to investigate these diseases due to various technical and economic limitations poses a significant challenge. Moreover, the use of in-vivo models involving other primates and rodents for experimentation further poses a challenge due to physiological variations between humans and other species and has ethical constraints. Our study explores how the BBB-on-chip overcomes a lot of these limitations posed by the other in-vitro and in-vivo models, making it a more efficient and accurate model to investigate the blood-brain barrier. The study further explains the evolution, applications, and future prospects of the BBB on-chip technologies.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Knowledge Learning and Science Technology ISSN 2959-6386 (online)Same topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207