MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016658684 · doi:10.1016/j.jhse.2007.05.017

The Inflammatory Response and Hyaluronan Synthases in the Rabbit Flexor Tendon and Tendon Sheath Following Injury

2007· article· en· W2016658684 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Berglund, David A. Hart, Monica Wiig

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersInstitute of Gender and HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaCalgary Foundation
KeywordsTendonMedicineMessenger RNAReverse transcription polymerase chain reactionDownregulation and upregulationMatrix metalloproteinaseWound healingPathologyTendon sheathAnatomyAndrologySurgeryChemistryInternal medicineBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a rabbit model of flexor tendon injury, mRNA levels for a subset of relevant molecules involved in inflammatory and fibrotic processes were assessed by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction 3, 6, 12 and 24 days after injury. Increased levels of COX-2, IL-1beta, MMP-13 and TIMP-1 mRNA were detected in both tendon and tendon sheath following injury, with each molecule exhibiting tissue and time-dependent changes. MMP-13 and TIMP-1 mRNA levels were markedly upregulated in both tissues, whereas COX-2 and IL-1beta predominantly increased in tendon. Both hyaluronan synthase (HAS) 2 and 3 exhibited increases in mRNA levels in tendon tissue after injury, HAS 2 being more pronounced. These findings support the concept that healing in the flexor tendon and the sheath involve different molecular events and that each tissue may require unique modifications if healing is to be enhanced and adhesions reduced.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations50
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hand Surgery (European Volume)Same topicTendon Structure and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207