MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W171312984

Early Mechanisms of Retinal Degeneration in the harlequin Mouse

2014· article· en· W171312984 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Eric A. Dolinar

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchLawson Health Research Institute
KeywordsRetinal degenerationDegeneration (medical)RetinalRetinaAnatomyBiologyMedicineNeuroscienceOphthalmology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Retinal diseases are personally debilitating and expensive, yet many early disease mechanisms leading to their onset and progression remain poorly understood. The harlequin mouse is a model of human mitochondrial dysfunction and parainflammation leading to subsequent cerebellar and retinal degeneration. Diagnosis of retinal degeneration can be tracked in vivo and is associated with AIF dysfunction. Here, retinal dysfunction in the harlequin mouse was first quantified using electroretinography followed by assay of blood-retinal-barrier integrity and transcriptome alterations in young adulthood. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling of oscillatory potentials provided a novel, comprehensive assessment of inner-retinal health and can detect shifts in OP parameters. Barrier integrity ruled out confounding exogenous antigens and confirmed an endogenous source of retinal tissue malfunction. In addition, transcriptome alterations support the necessity of the hq retina to maintain metabolic demands. Alternative metabolism pathways are hypothesized to be important for hq complex I mitochondrial-dysfunction associated retinal degeneration.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.271
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207