Bioinks for engineering gradient-based osteochondral and meniscal tissue substitutes: a review
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
Gradient tissues are anisotropic structure with gradual transition in structural and biological properties. The gradient in structural, mechanical and biochemical properties of osteochondral and meniscal tissues play a major role in defining tissue functions. Designing tissue substitutes that replicate these gradient properties is crucial to facilitate regeneration of tissue functions following injuries. Advanced manufacturing technologies such as 3D bioprinting hold great potentials for recreating gradient nature of tissues through using zone-specific bioinks and layer-by-layer deposition of spatially defined biomaterials, cell types and bioactive cues. This review highlighted the gradients in osteochondral and meniscal tissues in detail, elaborated on individual components of the bioink, and reviewed recent advancements in 3D gradient-based osteochondral and meniscal tissue substitutes. Finally, key challenges of the field and future perspectives for developing gradient-based tissue substitutes were discussed. The insights from these advances can broaden the possibilities for engineering gradient tissues.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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