MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estrogen–Growth Factor Interactions and Their Contributions to Neurological Disorders

2008· review· en· W1974061859 on OpenAlexaff
Helen E. Scharfman, Neil J. MacLusky

Bibliographic record

VenueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face Pain · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsEstrogenEndocrinologyInternal medicineNeurotrophinNeurotrophic factorsMenopauseVascular endothelial growth factorBrain-derived neurotrophic factorNerve growth factorMedicineNeuroscienceBiologyReceptorVEGF receptors

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estrogen has diverse and powerful effects in the brain, including actions on neurons, glia, and the vasculature. It is not surprising, therefore, that there are many changes in the female brain as serum estradiol levels rise and fall during the normal ovarian cycle. At times of life when estradiol levels change dramatically, such as puberty, postpartum, or menopause, there also are dramatic changes in the central nervous system. Changes that occur because of fluctuations in serum estrogen levels are potentially relevant to neurological disorders because symptoms often vary with the time of the ovarian cycle. Moreover, neurological disorders (eg, seizures and migraine) often increase in frequency in women when estradiol levels change. In this review, the contribution of 2 growth factors targeted by estrogen, the neurotrophin brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), will be discussed. Estrogen-sensitive response elements are present on the genes for both BDNF and VEGF, and they are potent modulators of neuronal, glial, and vascular function, making them logical candidates to mediate the multitude of effects of estrogen. In addition, BDNF induces neuropeptide Y, which has diverse actions that are relevant to estrogen action and to the same neurological disorders.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
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

Citations80
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face PainSame topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanismsFrench-language works237,207