MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hypersensitivity of the Anesthesia-Induced Comatose Brain

2007· article· en· W2019684708 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Kroeger, Florin Amzica

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurstingBurst suppressionNeuroscienceExcitatory postsynaptic potentialComa (optics)ElectroencephalographyAnesthesiaExtracellularMedicinePsychologyInhibitory postsynaptic potentialChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing levels of anesthesia are thought to produce a progressive loss of brain responsiveness to external stimuli. Here, we present the first report of a state window within anesthesia-induced coma, usually associated with an EEG pattern of burst suppression, during which brain excitability is dramatically increased so that even subliminal stimuli elicit bursts of whole-brain activity. We investigated this phenomenon in vivo using intracellular recordings of both neurons and glia, as well as extracellular calcium and EEG recordings. The results indicate that the bursting activity elicited with mechanical microstimulations, but also with auditory and visual stimuli, is dependent on complex mechanisms, including modulation of excitatory (NMDA) components, gap junction transmission, as well as the extracellular calcium concentration. The occurrence of bursting events is associated with a postburst refractory period that underlies the genesis of the alternating burst-suppression pattern. These findings raise the issue of what burst spontaneity during anesthesia-induced coma means and opens new venues for the handling of comatose 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations222
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207