MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

REVIEW ARTICLE: Toll‐Like Receptor Signaling and Pre‐Eclampsia

2009· review· en· W1523247704 on OpenAlexafffund
Fang Xie, Stuart E. Turvey, Michelle A. Williams, Gil Mor, Peter von Dadelszen

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Reproductive Immunology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsInnate immune systemEclampsiaBiologyImmunologyInflammationImmune systemSignal transductionReceptorToll-like receptorPathogen-associated molecular patternPattern recognition receptorCell biologyPregnancyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Systemic inflammation and abnormal/poor placentation represent hallmarks of pre-eclampsia. Accumulating evidence suggests that infectious agents might increase the risk of pre-eclampsia; the innate immune defense mechanisms may interact with pro-inflammatory pathways, and contribute to the development of pre-eclampsia. The evidence for this has been supported by indirect epidemiologic and clinical studies, as well as by some direct support from experimental studies. Recent data directly implicate signaling by Toll-like receptors in the pathogenesis of pre-eclampsia, and establish a crucial link between pre-eclampsia and defense against both foreign pathogens and endogenously generated inflammatory ligands. Here, we review the rapid progress in this field, which has improved our understanding of the interplay between pathogen invasion, innate immune defense mechanisms, and pre-eclampsia.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations33
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Reproductive ImmunologySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207