MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045892365 · doi:10.1097/shk.0b013e3181c0f068

SEPSIS, LEUKOCYTES, AND NITRIC OXIDE (NO)

2010· review· en· W2045892365 on OpenAlexafffund
Carl Fortin, Patrick P. McDonald, Tamás Fülöp, Olivier Lesur

Bibliographic record

VenueShock · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsHealth and Social Services Centre University Institute of Geriatrics of SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSepsisSeptic shockImmune systemNitric oxideImmunologyMedicineInflammationShock (circulatory)BiologyCell biologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sepsis is exceedingly burdensome for hospital intensive care unit caregivers, and its incidence, as well as sepsis-related deaths, is increasing steadily. Sepsis is characterized by a robust increase in NO production throughout the organism that is driven by iNOS. Moreover, NO is an important factor in the development of septic shock and is synthesized by NOS, an enzyme expressed by a variety of cells, including vascular endothelium, macrophages, and neutrophils. However, the effects of NO on leukocyte functions, and the underlying mechanisms, are relatively unknown. Thus, the present review focuses on the effects of NO and its derivatives on cells of the immune system. Experimental evidences discussed herein show that NO induces posttranslational modifications of key proteins in targeted processes with the potential of deterring cellular physiology. Consequently, the manipulation of NO distribution in septic patients, used in conjunction with conventional treatments aimed at restoring normal immune functions, may represent a valuable therapeutic strategy.

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
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.282
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 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

Citations76
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueShockSame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207