MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404958999 · doi:10.3390/biomimetics9120733

Three-Dimensional Bioprinting for Retinal Tissue Engineering

2024· review· en· W4404958999 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Y. Wu, Rahma M Osman, Natalie Kearn, Ananda Kalevar

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomimetics · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomimeticsScaffold3D bioprintingComputer scienceTissue engineeringBench to bedsideNanotechnologyRegenerative medicineEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringBiologyStem cellMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three-dimensional bioprinting (3DP) is transforming the field of regenerative medicine by enabling the precise fabrication of complex tissues, including the retina, a highly specialized and anatomically complex tissue. This review provides an overview of 3DP's principles, its multi-step process, and various bioprinting techniques, such as extrusion-, droplet-, and laser-based methods. Within the scope of biomimicry and biomimetics, emphasis is placed on how 3DP potentially enables the recreation of the retina's natural cellular environment, structural complexity, and biomechanical properties. Focusing on retinal tissue engineering, we discuss the unique challenges posed by the retina's layered structure, vascularization needs, and the complex interplay between its numerous cell types. Emphasis is placed on recent advancements in bioink formulations, designed to emulate retinal characteristics and improve cell viability, printability, and mechanical stability. In-depth analyses of bioinks, scaffold materials, and emerging technologies, such as microfluidics and organ-on-a-chip, highlight the potential of bioprinted models to replicate retinal disease states, facilitating drug development and testing. While challenges remain in achieving clinical translation-particularly in immune compatibility and long-term integration-continued innovations in bioinks and scaffolding are paving the way toward functional retinal constructs. We conclude with insights into future research directions, aiming to refine 3DP for personalized therapies and transformative applications in vision restoration.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomimeticsSame topic3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207