MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409899809 · doi:10.1051/medsci/2025046

Modèles cellulaires des maladies inflammatoires du segment antérieur de l’œil

2025· review· fr· W4409899809 on OpenAlexafffund
Gabrielle Raîche-Marcoux, Sylvain L. Guérin, Élodie Boisselier

Bibliographic record

Venuemédecine/sciences · 2025
Typereview
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFonds de recherche du Québec
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several multifactorial pathologies in ophthalmology that affect the anterior segment of the eye are partly inflammatory. To better understand the role and impact of inflammation in dry eye and corneal healing, many research teams have used in vitro models to mimic different aspects of these diseases. Several in vitro models have been developed to elucidate the signaling cascades involved in pathogenesis. They also offer the experimental flexibility to adjust environmental parameters, facilitating the validation of innovative therapies and the identification of new pharmacological targets. This review focuses on two-dimensional in vitro models, but also highlights the progress made in 3D models obtained by tissue engineering, which mimic inflammation in these ocular pathologies. The origin of the cells (human or animal), their tissue source, the type of cells (epithelial, endothelial, vascular, conjunctival), as well as the various experimental conditions used to mimic an inflammatory aspect according to the stages of progression of these pathologies, are thoroughly reported in this review of the literature.

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)0.000
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: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemédecine/sciencesSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207