MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995409772 · doi:10.1186/1471-2210-7-s1-s12

The NO-cGMP axis in endothelial ischemia and ischemic preconditioning

2007· article· en· W1995409772 on OpenAlexaff
Tommaso Gori, John D. Parker

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pharmacology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Ischemia and Reperfusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIschemic preconditioningMedicineIschemiaPharmacologyCardiologyAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The biology of cardiac and peripheral ischemia and reperfusion (IR) injury is extremely complex, and the vascular endothelium plays a central role both in protecting from ischemic damage as well as in mediating this damage. Due to its strategic location and its intense biosynthetic activity, the vascular endothelium is particularly sensitive to IR: the endothelium is the first tissue damaged by IR, and human in vivo models of isolated endothelial IR injury have been developed that allow investigating the mechanisms of this phenomenon. Particularly during reperfusion, the rapid formation of superoxide anion and other reactive oxygen species causes endothelial damage, leading to the so-called no-reflow phenomenon. In this way, the endothelium determines permanent impairment to tissue reperfusion, extending the ischemic damage. At the same time, the endothelium, like any other tissue, can be preconditioned against IR damage, i.e., it is able to develop a protective phenotype that defends itself and the tissues from IR. We will discuss how the endothelium is the first casualty in the setting of IR, and at the same time how this tissue can be protected by physical and pharmacological stimuli, which opens new therapeutic possibilities. from 3rd International Conference on cGMP Generators, Effectors and Therapeutic Implications Dresden, Germany. 15–17 June 2007

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PharmacologySame topicCardiac Ischemia and ReperfusionFrench-language works237,207