Circadian rhythms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: : Circadian rhythms are intrinsic timekeeping mechanisms that allow for adaptation to cyclic environmental changes. Increasing evidence suggests that circadian rhythms may influence progression of a variety of diseases as well as effectiveness and toxicity of drugs commonly used in the intensive care unit. In this perspective, we provide a brief review of the molecular mechanisms of circadian rhythms and its relevance to critical care. DATA SOURCES, STUDY SELECTION, DATA EXTRACTION, AND DATA SYNTHESIS:: Articles related to circadian rhythms and organ systems in normal and disease conditions were searched through the PubMed library with the goal of providing a concise review. CONCLUSIONS: : Critically ill patients may be highly vulnerable to disruption of circadian rhythms as a result of the severity of their underlying diseases as well as the intensive care unit environment where noise and frequent therapeutic/diagnostic interventions take place. Further basic and clinical research addressing the importance of circadian rhythms in the context of critical care is warranted to develop a better understanding of the complex pathophysiology of critically ill patients as well as to identify novel therapeutic approaches for these patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".