Cited by 55Machine Learning in Materials SciencePolymer Surface Interaction StudiesCellular Mechanics and Interactions

Modelling human embryoid body cell adhesion to a combinatorial library of polymer surfaces

Open access
Epa, V. Chandana, Yang, Jing, Mei, Ying, Hook, Andrew L., Langer, Robert, Anderson, Daniel G., Davies, Martyn C., Alexander, Morgan R. +1 more·2012·Journal of Materials Chemistry

Abstract

Designing materials to control biology is an intense focus of biomaterials and regenerative medicine research. Discovering and designing materials with appropriate biological compatibility or active control of cells and tissues is being increasingly undertaken using high throughput synthesis and assessment methods. We report a relatively simple but powerful machine-learning method of generating models that link microscopic or molecular properties of polymers or other materials to their biological effects. We illustrate the potential of these methods by developing the first robust, predictive, quantitative, and purely computational models of adhesion of human embryonic stem cell embryoid bodies (hEB) to the surfaces of a 496-member polymer micro array library.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1039/c2jm34782b

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Epa, V. C., Yang, J., Mei, Y., Hook, A. L., Langer, R., Anderson, D. G., Davies, M. C., Alexander, M. R., & Winkler, D. A.
Affiliations
  • Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research At MIT (US)
Corresponding author
Winkler, David A.
Venue
Journal of Materials Chemistry
Published
2012
Volume
22
Issue
39
Pages
20902
ISSN
  • 0959-9428 (ISSN-L)
  • 1364-5501
OpenAlex
W2097122306
Cited by
55
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Materials Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Nottingham ePrints (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PMC
Funders
Wellcome Trust (085245)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Surfaces, Coatings and Films › Polymer Surface Interaction Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Cellular Mechanics and Interactions
Keywords
cell adhesion, polymer microarrays, machine learning, polymer surface properties, biomaterials, high-throughput materials screening

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review