MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132933772

The effects of contact guidance and electrical field stimulation on the maturation of cardiac progenitors and cardiomyocytes

2008· dissertation· W7132933772 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hoi Ting Heidi Au

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2008
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsEmbryonic stem cellStimulationStem cellCell cultureProgenitor cellGap junctionCardiac function curveCell
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac tissue engineering requires an appropriate cell source. We investigated the feasibility of various immature cardiac cells, namely neonatal heart cells and embryonic stem cell derived cardiomyocytes and progenitors, in their ability to create the desired adult cardiomyocyte (CM) phenotype. We found that the application of contact guidance and electrical field stimulation improved the alignment and elongation of neonatal cells within a monolayer cultured polyvinyl carbonate or tissue culture polystyrene, as well as the contractile function of the culture. These cells were found to express mature cardiac cell markers such as Troponin I and alpha-sacromeric actinin, in addition to forming gap junctions with neighbouring cells. A similar approach, applied to human embryonic stem cells derived-cardiomyocytes (hESC-CM), shows some promise in maturing these cells into the adult cardiomyocyte phenotype. Finally, we also explored various methods for isolating isl14+ cardiac progenitors from the neonatal rat heart.

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)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineFrench-language works237,207