MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037943939 · doi:10.1097/mjt.0b013e31825b9eb5

Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitors and Neuroprotection

2012· review· en· W2037943939 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Therapeutics · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsMoclobemideClorgylineRasagilineNeuroprotectionMonoamine oxidaseTranylcypromineMedicinePharmacologyMonoamine neurotransmitterMonoamine oxidase inhibitorMonoamine oxidase BPhenelzineMonoamine oxidase APsychiatryChemistryParkinson's diseaseInternal medicineAntidepressantBiochemistryEnzymeSerotonin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monoamine oxidase inhibitors have been available for more than 50 years, initially developed as antidepressants but currently used in a variety of psychiatric and neurological conditions. There has been a recent surge of interest in monoamine oxidase inhibitors because of their reported neuroprotective and/or neurorescue properties. Interestingly, it seems that often these properties are independent of their ability to inhibit monoamine oxidase. This review article presents an overview of the neuroprotective/neurorescue properties of these multifaceted drugs and focuses on phenelzine, (-)-deprenyl, rasagiline, ladostigil, tranylcypromine, moclobemide, and clorgyline and their possible neuroprotective mechanisms.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.815

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.280 · 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