MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004595114 · doi:10.1177/1091581810397774

Effects of Anesthetics and Terminal Procedures on Biochemical and Hormonal Measurements in Polychlorinated Biphenyl Treated Rats

2011· article· en· W2004595114 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Desaulniers, Al Yagminas, I. Chu, Jamie S. Nakai

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Toxicology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsofluraneInhalationUric acidChemistryToxicantHormoneLactate dehydrogenaseCorticosteroneEndocrinologyInternal medicineAnesthesiaMedicineToxicityBiochemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This investigation reports the effects of various terminal procedures, and how they modified the responses to a toxicant (polychlorinated biphenyls [A1254], 130 mg/kg/day × 5 days) administered by gavage to Sprague-Dawley male rats. Terminal procedures included exsanguination via the abdominal aorta under anesthesia (isoflurane inhalation or Equithesin injection), decapitation with or without anesthesia, or narcosis induced by carbon dioxide inhalation. Effects of repeated anesthesia were also tested. Terminal procedures induced confounding stress responses, particularly when Equithesin was used. The terminal procedures modified the conclusions about effects of A1254 on the concentrations of corticosterone, insulin, glucagon, glucose, alkaline phosphatase, lactate dehydrogenase, uric acid, and blood urea nitrogen, from nonstatistically significant to significant changes, and in the case of luteinizing hormone from a statistically significant increase to a significant decrease. Investigations of effects of toxicants should be designed and interpreted considering potential changes induced by the selection of a terminal procedure.

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)0.000
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 score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.296
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 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

Citations14
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ToxicologySame topicStress Responses and CortisolFrench-language works237,207