MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Chronic Estrogen Treatment Modifies Insulin-Induced Insulin Resistance and Hypertension in Ovariectomized Rats

2005· article· en· W1984236882 on OpenAlexafffund
Daqian Song, Emi Arikawa, Denise Galipeau, Jia‐Rong Yeh, Mary L. Battell, Violet G. Yuen, John H. McNeill

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Hypertension · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of British Columbia and YukonHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsInternal medicineEndocrinologyHyperinsulinemiaMedicineInsulin resistanceOvariectomized ratInsulinEstrogenBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Gender differences have been found in the development of hypertension. The role of estrogen in the association between hyperinsulinemia/insulin resistance and hypertension was investigated in an insulin-induced, insulin-resistant, and hypertensive model. METHODS: Ovariectomized or sham operated female Wistar rats were chronically treated with insulin and/or estrogen via subcutaneous implants (insulin, 2 U/day; 17beta-estradiol 0.5 mg/pellet, 60-day release). Systolic blood pressure was monitored at weeks 0, 3, and 6. At week 7, an oral glucose tolerance test was performed. RESULTS: Ovariectomy resulted in the development of insulin resistance and blood pressure elevation in chronically insulin-treated female rats. Chronic estrogen treatment prevented the elevation in blood pressure and the development of insulin resistance. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that chronic estrogen treatment modifies the insulin-induced hypertension by increasing insulin sensitivity in ovariectomized rats.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations31
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of HypertensionSame topicMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207