MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Of mice and men: experimental autoimmune encephalitis and multiple sclerosis

2011· review· en· W1506772383 on OpenAlexaff
Adam E. Handel, Matthew R. Lincoln, Sreeram V. Ramagopalan

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Clinical Investigation · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiple sclerosisAutoimmune encephalitisImmunologyEncephalitisDiseasePathogenesisMedicineAutoimmune diseaseNeuroimmunologyPathologyVirusImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Research using experimental autoimmune encephalitis (EAE) models accounts for almost 20% of the papers. published in multiple sclerosis (MS). METHODS: We performed a literature review of papers indexed with ISI Web of Science on EAE and MS over the last 30 years and a detailed analysis of studies of molecular pathways in EAE published in 2008 and 2009. RESULTS: The impact of EAE studies declines more rapidly than other studies published on MS (EAE cited corrected half-life = 4·00 years vs. MS cited corrected half-life = 9·66 years, P < 0·0001). The pathology of EAE differs quite markedly from that observed in the human disease. EAE has implicated many different genes as important to pathogenesis but only a minority of these are supported by human studies. CONCLUSIONS: Future research should critically appraise precisely what is being modelled by EAE before drawing conclusions about human disease.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.426
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.011 · 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

Citations43
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Clinical InvestigationSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207