MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1911929158 · doi:10.1111/ejn.13018

Releasing ‘brakes’ to nerve regeneration: intrinsic molecular targets

2015· review· en· W1911929158 on OpenAlexafffund
Anand Krishnan, Arul Duraikannu, Douglas W. Zochodne

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neuroscience · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersFaculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of AlbertaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates - Health SolutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of CalgaryCanadian Diabetes Association
KeywordsRegeneration (biology)NeuroscienceAxonPeripheral nerve injuryPTENBiologyPeripheralInhibitory postsynaptic potentialNerve injurySignal transductionMedicineCell biologyPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwayInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Restoring critical neuronal architecture after peripheral nerve injury is challenging. Although immediate regenerative responses to peripheral axon injury involve the synthesis of regeneration-associated proteins in neurons and Schwann cells, an unfavorable balance between growth facilitatory and growth inhibitory signaling impairs the growth continuum of injured peripheral nerves. Molecules involved with the signaling network of tumor suppressors play crucial roles in shifting the balance between growth and restraint during axon regeneration. An understanding of the molecular framework of tumor suppressor molecules in injured neurons and its impact on stage-specific regeneration events may expose therapeutic intervention points. In this review we discuss how signaling networks of the specific tumor suppressors PTEN, Rb1, p53, p27 and p21 are altered in injured peripheral nerves and how this impacts peripheral nerve regeneration. Insights into the roles and importance of these pathways may open new avenues for improving the neurological deficits associated with nerve injury.

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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations36
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeuroscienceSame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207