MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045401011 · doi:10.1007/s10875-010-9404-7

Immunoglobulin G: A Potential Treatment to Attenuate Neuroinflammation Following Spinal Cord Injury

2010· review· en· W2045401011 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael G. Fehlings, Dung Hoang Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Immunology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchKrembil FoundationPhysicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
KeywordsNeuroinflammationMedical microbiologyMedicineSpinal cord injuryImmunologyAntibodySpinal cordImmunoglobulin GInflammationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord injury (SCI) is caused by two related but mechanistically distinct events: the primary injury to the spinal cord is caused by a mechanic trauma; the secondary injury is a cascade of cellular and molecular events that exacerbates the initial damage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Neuroinflammation, an important event in the secondary injury cascade, is critical in the clearance of cellular debris after SCI. However, leukocytes and microglia, recruited to the injury site during neuroinflammation, can exacerbate the initial damage following SCI by secreting reactive oxygen species, matrix-metalloproteinase, and proinflammatory cytokines. Therefore, attenuating the activity of leukocytes and microglia is an attractive therapeutic strategy to reduce the neurological deficit associated with SCI. DISCUSSION: In this regard, immunoglobulin G (IgG) is a potential treatment candidate. IgG has been used clinically to treat autoimmune disease and has been demonstrated to attenuate the activities of leukocytes and microglia. In this review, we discuss the potential use of IgG for SCI based on the current understanding of the immune-modulating mechanism of IgG and the role of neuroinflammation in SCI.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations78
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical ImmunologySame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207