MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W155855746 · doi:10.1096/fasebj.21.5.a124-a

The multi‐coloured guinea pig is a novel animal model to study the effects of intrauterine growth restriction on bone and body composition

2007· article· en· W155855746 on OpenAlexafffund
Laura L. Burr, Hope A. Weiler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOffspringMedicineFetusIn uteroBone mineralIntrauterine growth restrictionCalorieCalorie restrictionPhysiologyBone densityLean body massInternal medicineEndocrinologyPregnancyBody weightBiologyOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compromised intrauterine nutrition predisposes a fetus to obesity and low bone mass in later life. Design of health interventions to attenuate these sequelea requires the use of animal models of fetal programming. Restricting calorie or protein intake in pregnant rats is most widely used to induce fetal programming. However, the health characteristics of offspring are variable and inconsistently mirror observations in humans. Thus, the objective of this study was to restrict protein intake in pregnant guinea pigs (N=40) to 50% of requirements and observe the effects on body composition and bone, since guinea pigs mineralize bone in utero. Dual energy x‐ray absorptiometry scans were conducted on d 3 and 21 of life and one‐way ANOVA (P<0.05) was used to determine differences between groups. At birth, body weight and length of protein‐restricted (PR) pups in comparison to controls was 30% lower and lean body mass was reduced by 20%. Femoral, tibia, and lumbar spine bone mineral content (BMC) and density (BMD) were 15–30% lower in PR pups than controls. Moreover, whole body BMC and BMD were significantly compromised in PR offspring and this persisted at d 21 of life. Thus, the intrauterine PR guinea pig displays health traits very alike the human small for gestational age neonate. Further investigation is needed to determine whether associated health parameters, such as blood glucose control, are also abnormal. NSERC funded.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicBirth, Development, and Health→French-language works237,207→