MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W150224565 · doi:10.1139/jpn.0219

Neuroactive steroids and anxiety disorders

2002· article· en· W150224565 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jean‐Michel Le Mellédo, Glen B. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroactive steroidReceptorNeurotransmitter receptorClass C GPCRGlutamate receptorNeuroscienceNeurotransmitterLong-term depressionBiologyChemistryGABAA receptorCell biologyEndocrinologyBiochemistryMetabotropic glutamate receptorAMPA receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The classic mechanism of action of steroid hormones involves binding to their respective intracellular receptors, which act as transcription factors in the regulation of gene expression. The ensuing effects, described as the genomic effects of steroids, are relatively slow. Evidence that some steroids, through interaction with certain neurotransmitter receptors, can alter neuronal excitability at the cell surface has led to the description of the rapid membrane effects of steroids. The term “neuroactive steroid” (NAS) has been coined for steroids with these particular properties.1 Diverse mechanisms for rapid steroid effects have now been described, and the nongenomic effects of NASs may involve γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors, glutamate receptors, nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, sigma receptors, 5-HT3 receptors, or voltage- or non-voltage-gated calcium channels. These various mechanisms are reportedly involved in functions as diverse as sleep, anxiety, seizure activity, aggressive behaviour, response to stress, and neuronal regeneration and protection, as well as in learning and memory.2

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations44
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatry and NeuroscienceSame topicNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchFrench-language works237,207