MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W48639200 · doi:10.1089/ten.teb.2013.0452

Control of Scaffold Degradation in Tissue Engineering: A Review

2014· review· en· W48639200 on OpenAlexafffund
Hongbo Zhang, Li Zhou, Wenjun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueTissue Engineering Part B Reviews · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersSaskatchewan Health Research Foundation
KeywordsScaffoldTissue engineeringBiomaterialContext (archaeology)Regeneration (biology)Biomedical engineeringBiochemical engineeringFunction (biology)EngineeringComputer scienceCell biologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tissue engineering has shown a great promise as a solution to the high demand for tissue and organ transplantations. Biomaterial scaffolds serve to house and direct cells to grow, exposing them to an adequate perfusion of nutrients, oxygen, metabolic products, and appropriate growth factors to enhance their differentiation and function. The degradation of biomaterial scaffolds is a key factor to successful tissue regeneration. In this article, the existing degradation control approaches in the context of scaffold tissue engineering were reviewed and a new paradigm of thinking called active control of scaffold degradation, proposed elsewhere by us, was also revisited and discussed in light of its benefit and requirement of this new technology.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations278
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTissue Engineering Part B ReviewsSame topicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207