MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972177041 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.100135

Mismatch Between Skills of Patients and Tools in Use: Might Literacy Affect Diagnoses and Research?

2010· letter· en· W1972177041 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rima E. Rudd

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2010
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWnt signaling pathwayDKK1MedicineLRP6AgonistWNT3AIn vivoLigand (biochemistry)Cancer researchCartilageCell biologyInternal medicineSignal transductionEndocrinologyReceptorBiologyAnatomyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Wnt signaling pathway promotes tissue regeneration and is a promising therapeutic target for treatment of osteolytic bone diseases. Here we report the discovery of a novel type of canonical Wnt agonist antibody that does not operate as a ligand surrogate. The antibody increases Wnt/β-catenin signaling with or without exogenously provided Wnt ligands. It binds to a site on the P3 domain of LRP6 that is distinct from where the Wnt3a ligand and the DKK1 antagonist bind. The agonist effect persists in the presence of DKK1 and is further amplified by R-spondin even when Wnt ligands are not provided, suggesting a potential use for this antibody in ligand-low or insufficient settings. The antibody induces osteoblastic differentiation and mineralization in vitro and restores bone loss in vivo in a myeloma-derived intrafemoral mouse model, opening a potential path for therapeutic development in osteolytic diseases caused by cancer and aging.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0170.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.386 · 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
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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207