MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1783140960 · doi:10.1155/2004/215359

Control the Epithelial Barrier: A Pivotal First Line of Defense

2004· letter· en· W1783140960 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Catherine McKay, Derek M. McKay

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Gastroenterology · 2004
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBarrier Structure and Function Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParacellular transportTranscellularTranscytosisBarrier functionTight junctionEpitheliumInflammationCell biologyCytokineImmunologyPermeability (electromagnetism)Inflammatory bowel diseaseBiologyChemistryMedicineCellDiseasePathologyEndocytosisMembraneBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lumen-derived material gains access to the mucosa by permeating between adjacent epithelial cells (ie, paracellular pathway), by transcytosis across the apical and basolateral cell membranes (ie, transcellular pathway) or by exploiting breaks or erosions in the epithelium that may, for example, result from inflammation. Increased epithelial permeability (or decreased barrier function) has repeatedly been demonstrated in a variety of gut disturbances; notably, in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). There has been an exponential increase in our knowledge of the structural elements that comprise the epithelial barrier, and of the intrinsic factors (eg, cytokines) and external stimuli (eg, bacterial toxins) that can either perturb or enhance epithelial permeability. Canadian researchers have been very active in the study of epithelial permeability and have been responsible for major advances in the field, documenting increased permeability in patients with ulcer disease and IBD and some of their first degree relatives (as well as before onset of overt inflammation), and elucidating mechanisms of stress-induced and cytokine-induced increases in permeability (1-8). A recent study from Scott et al (9) continues this impressive tradition.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.546
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of GastroenterologySame topicBarrier Structure and Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207