MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996141403 · doi:10.14740/wjnu199w

Arginine as a Significant Regulator of Supersaturation in Calcium Oxalate Lithiasis: the Physiological Evidence

2015· article· en· W1996141403 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S. Atanassova

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Nephrology and Urology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalcium oxalateUrineOxalateSupersaturationArginineCalciumExcretionMedicineUrinary stoneHuman studiesInternal medicineChemistryChromatographyUrinary systemBiochemistryAmino acidInorganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: At present, the possible effect of arginine as a natural regulator of calcium oxalate (CaOX) supersaturation and crystallization in human urine has been analyzed. Methods: Two types of experiments have been discussed: clinical laboratory analysis on the urine excretion of arginine (Arg) in patients with CaOX lithiasis and detailed measurements of the kinetics of the dissolution of CaOX calculi in artificial urine, containing various concentrations of Arg. Results: A detailed analysis showed that 80% of stone formers (SFs) eliminated pathological values: 30% of patients had lower plasma levels compared to controls and about 50% of SFs showed higher concentration. Urine concentrations in these two groups were not reported. Conclusions: The in vitro analytical measurements demonstrate even a possibility to dissolve CaOX stones in human urine, in which increased concentration of Arg has been established. Discussions have arisen to use increased concentration of Arg in urine both as a solubilizator of CaOX stones in humans and on the purpose of a prolonged metaphylactic treatment. World J Nephrol Urol. 2015;4(1):173-177 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/wjnu199w

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Nephrology and UrologySame topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207