MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015642857 · doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2012.176

Inhaled Nitric Oxide Reduces Secondary Brain Damage after Traumatic Brain Injury in Mice

2012· article· en· W2015642857 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole A. Terpolilli, Seong-Woong Kim, Serge C. Thal, Wolfgang M. Kuebler, Nikolaus Plesnila

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTraumatic brain injuryInhalationCerebral blood flowAnesthesiaPenumbraIschemiaIntracranial pressureBrain damageNitric oxideBrain ischemiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ischemia, especially pericontusional ischemia, is one of the leading causes of secondary brain damage after traumatic brain injury (TBI). So far efforts to improve cerebral blood flow (CBF) after TBI were not successful because of various reasons. We previously showed that nitric oxide (NO) applied by inhalation after experimental ischemic stroke is transported to the brain and induces vasodilatation in hypoxic brain regions, thus improving regional ischemia, thereby improving brain damage and neurological outcome. As regional ischemia in the traumatic penumbra is a key mechanism determining secondary posttraumatic brain damage, the aim of the current study was to evaluate the effect of NO inhalation after experimental TBI. NO inhalation significantly improved CBF and reduced intracranial pressure after TBI in male C57 Bl/6 mice. Long-term application (24 hours NO inhalation) resulted in reduced lesion volume, reduced brain edema formation and less blood-brain barrier disruption, as well as improved neurological function. No adverse effects, e.g., on cerebral auto-regulation, systemic blood pressure, or oxidative damage were observed. NO inhalation might therefore be a safe and effective treatment option for TBI patients.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.266
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 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

Citations107
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cerebral Blood Flow & MetabolismSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207