MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1495556587 · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2014.273995

The microbiota–gut–brain axis in gastrointestinal disorders: stressed bugs, stressed brain or both?

2014· review· en· W1495556587 on OpenAlexaff
Giada De Palma, Stephen M. Collins, Přemysl Berčík, Elena F. Verdú

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGut–brain axisMedicineNeuroscienceBiologyGut floraImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The gut-brain axis is the bidirectional communication between the gut and the brain, which occurs through multiple pathways that include hormonal, neural and immune mediators. The signals along this axis can originate in the gut, the brain or both, with the objective of maintaining normal gut function and appropriate behaviour. In recent years, the study of gut microbiota has become one of the most important areas in biomedical research. Attention has focused on the role of gut microbiota in determining normal gut physiology and immunity and, more recently, on its role as modulator of host behaviour ('microbiota-gut-brain axis'). We therefore review the literature on the role of gut microbiota in gut homeostasis and link it with mechanisms that could influence behaviour. We discuss the association of dysbiosis with disease, with particular focus on functional bowel disorders and their relationship to psychological stress. This is of particular interest because exposure to stressors has long been known to increase susceptibility to and severity of gastrointestinal diseases.

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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations291
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicGastrointestinal motility and disordersFrench-language works237,207