MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W89808108 · doi:10.14670/hh-29.669

Mesenchymal stem cell-based tissue engineering strategies for repair of articular cartilage.

2014· review· en· W89808108 on OpenAlexaff
Tamer A. Ahmed, Maxwell T. Hincke

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMesenchymal stem cellTissue engineeringChondrogenesisStem cellBiomedical engineeringCartilageStem cell transplantation for articular cartilage repairCell biologyMedicineChemistryAdult stem cellPathologyAnatomyCellular differentiationBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Restoration of articular cartilage function and structure following pathological or traumatic damage is still considered a challenging problem in the orthopaedic field. Currently, tissue engineering-based reconstruction of articular cartilage is a feasible and continuously developing strategy to restore structure and function. Successful articular cartilage tissue engineering strategy relies largely on several essential components including cellular component, supporting 3D carrier scaffolding matrix, bioactive agents, proper physical stimulants, and safe gene delivery. Designing the right formulations from these components remain the main concern of the orthopaedic community. Utilization of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) for articular cartilage tissue engineering is continuously increasing compared to use of chondrocytes. Various sources of MSCs have been investigated including adipose tissue, amniotic fluid, blood, bone marrow, dermis, embryonic stem cells, infrapatellar fat pad, muscle, periosteum, placenta, synovium, trabecular bone, and umbilical cord. MSCs derived from bone marrow and umbilical cord are currently in different phases of clinical trials. A wide range of matrices have been investigated to develop tissue engineering-based strategies including carbohydrate-based scaffolds (agarose, alginate, chitosan/chitin, and hyaluronate), protein-based scaffolds (collagen, fibrin, and gelatin), and artificial polymers (polyglycolic acid, polylactic acid, poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid), polyethylene glycol, and polycaprolactone). Collagen-based scaffolds and photopolymerizable PEG-based scaffolds are currently in different phases of clinical trials. TGF-β1, TGF-β3, BMP-2, and hypoxic environment are the recommended bioactive agents to induce optimum chondrogenesis of MSCs, while TGF-β1, TGF-β3, SOX-9, BMP-2, and BMP-7 genes are the best candidate for gene delivery to MSCs. Electromagnetic field and the combination of shear forces/dynamic compression are the best maturation-promoting physical stimulants.

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: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations80
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207