MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039705135 · doi:10.1586/erc.11.34

Translating promising preclinical neuroprotective therapies to human stroke trials

2011· review· en· W2039705135 on OpenAlexafffund
Douglas J. Cook, Michael Tymianski

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineNeuroprotectionClinical trialStroke (engine)Intensive care medicineDiseaseTranslational researchPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stroke is the third leading cause of mortality and carries the greatest socioeconomic burden of disease in North America. Despite several promising therapies discovered in the preclinical setting, there have been no positive results in human stroke clinical trials to date. In this article, we review the potential causes for failure and discuss strategies that have been proposed to overcome the barrier to translation of stroke therapies. To improve the chance of success in future human stroke trials, we propose that therapies be tested in stroke models that closely resemble the human condition with molecular, imaging and functional outcomes that relate to outcomes utilized in clinical trials. These strategies include higher-order, old-world, nonhuman primate models of stroke with clinically relevant outcome measures. Although stroke neuroprotection has been looked upon pessimistically given the many failures in clinical trials to date, we propose that neuroprotection in humans is feasible and will be realized with rigorous translational science.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.008
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.313
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.131 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations51
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Cardiovascular TherapySame topicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsFrench-language works237,207