MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W168560577 · doi:10.1055/s-2003-42643

Molecular Neurobiology of Acute Liver Failure

2003· review· en· W168560577 on OpenAlexaff
Roger F. Butterworth

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Liver Disease · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsHôpital Saint-Luc
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHepatic encephalopathyEdemaMedicineEncephalopathyCerebral edemaLiver injuryMitochondrionInternal medicineBiologyBiochemistryCirrhosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute liver failure results in encephalopathy and brain edema that is characterized by astrocytic cell swelling. Molecular biological techniques have led to the identification of alterations in expression of several genes coding for key astrocytic proteins in acute liver failure. Such proteins include amino acid transporters, structural proteins, the endothelial cell glucose transporter GLUT-1, the mitochondrial "peripheral-type" benzodiazepine receptor, and the water channel protein aquaporin IV. Magnetic resonance spectroscopic studies reveal increased brain lactate concentrations that are positively correlated with severity of encephalopathy and brain edema in acute liver failure, suggesting a deficit of cellular oxidative capacity and impending brain energy failure. Mild hypothermia prevents brain edema in acute liver failure, and mechanisms responsible for this beneficial effect include reduced blood-brain ammonia transfer as well as normalization of astrocytic amino acid transport and brain energy metabolism. Further elucidation of the molecular mechanisms responsible for brain edema and encephalopathy in acute liver failure will undoubtedly lead to novel treatment strategies for these complications.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Liver DiseaseSame topicLiver Disease and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207