MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010291087 · doi:10.2174/157339908786241151

Insights into the Regulation of Renal Hemodynamic Function in Diabetic Mellitus

2008· review· en· W2010291087 on OpenAlexaff
David Z.I. Cherney, James W. Scholey, Judith Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Diabetes Reviews · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEicosanoids and Hypertension Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHemodynamicsDiabetes mellitusDiabetic nephropathyInternal medicineEndocrinologyRenal functionNitric oxideRenin–angiotensin systemCyclooxygenaseBlood pressureBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is characterized by renal hemodynamic changes which have been purported to contribute to the development of nephropathy. In this review we have focused on the major renal hemodynamic factors that may be associated with glomerular hyperfiltration. Recent animal and human studies have demonstrated that renal hemodynamic alterations occur very early in the natural history of DM. Most of the literature related to renal hemodynamic functional changes in type 1 DM has focused on major neurohormonal influences, such as the renin angiotensin system, cyclooxygenase-related pathways, the nitric oxide system, the autonomic nervous system and hyperglycemia. In addition, gender may have important modulatory effects on some of these putative pathways that have been implicated in the development of alterations in renal hemodynamic function related to DM.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations59
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Diabetes ReviewsSame topicEicosanoids and Hypertension PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207