MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990693523 · doi:10.1196/annals.1304.035

Normalization of Up‐Regulated Cardiac Imidazoline I<sub>1</sub>‐Receptors and Natriuretic Peptides by Chronic Treatment with Moxonidine in Spontaneously Hypertensive Rats

2003· article· en· W1990693523 on OpenAlexafffund
Rouwayda El‐Ayoubi, Ahmed Ménaouar, Jolanta Gutkowska, Suhayla Mukaddam‐Daher

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMoxonidineAtrial natriuretic peptideImidazoline receptorInternal medicineReceptorEndocrinologyNatriuretic peptideBrain natriuretic peptideAgonistMedicineNPR2ChemistryHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of treatment with moxonidine (120 mg/kg/h sc, 4 weeks) on cardiac I(1)-receptors and natriuretic peptide synthesis was evaluated in spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR). I(1)-receptor protein (85 kD) was up-regulated in SHR atria, and normalized in right and left atria by moxonidine. Similarly, moxonidine normalized atrial and ventricular atrial natriuretic peptide messenger RNA (mRNA) and brain natriuretic peptide mRNA. This study shows that cardiac I(1)-receptors are functional, being regulated by hypertension and by chronic exposure to agonist, and that cardiac natriuretic peptides may be regulated by I(1)-receptor-mediated mechanisms.

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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.251
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 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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicReceptor Mechanisms and SignalingFrench-language works237,207