MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032938279 · doi:10.1159/000214361

Effect of Prenatal Drug Administration on Maternal and Neonatal Platelet Aggregation and PF <sub>4</sub> Release

2009· article· en· W2032938279 on OpenAlexaff
June M. Whaun, G. R. SMITH, V.A. Sochor

Bibliographic record

VenueHaemostasis · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBlood disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrugMedicinePlatelet aggregationPlateletDrug administrationPharmacologyFetusInternal medicinePregnancyBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Release of platelet antiheparin activity (platelet factor 4, PF4) induced by collagen and l-epinephrine, is normal in newborn infants without antenatal drug exposure. In contrast, PF4 release in platelets of infants of mothers with membrane-stabilizing drug ingestion is decreased to a greater extent than in their respective mothers. Platelet aggregation gives a qualitative indication of response. Platelets of mothers with antenatal drug exposure and those of their infants showed only a one-wave response to adenosine diphosphate, while platelets of these same mothers still showed a two-wave aggregation response to l-epinephrine. In contrast, platelets of all neonates lacked epinephrine-induced aggregation response, even when washed and resuspended in adult plasma. Our studies show that prenatal drugs have an effect on the platelet release mechanism in both mothers and their exposed infants; but the effect on the epinephrine-induced platelet response is less in mothers. Newborn infants have different aggregation and platelet release response to epinephrine which suggests that platelet aggregation and the release reaction can occur independently of each other.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designlow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designBench or experimental · Other design
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

Citations10
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHaemostasisSame topicBlood disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207