Male and female rats with severe protein restriction present delayed wound healing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Malnutrition remains a significant problem, not only in developing countries, but also in the developed world. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of protein restriction on rat excisional cutaneous healing. Male and female rats (12 weeks old) were exposed to different degrees of protein restriction (23%, 12% (slight restriction), and 0% (severe restriction)) for 12 weeks. On week 9, a full-thickness excisional skin lesion was performed, and the lesion area was measured to evaluate wound contraction and re-epithelialization. Euthanasia was performed after 12 weeks, and the lesion and adjacent skin were removed, fixed in formalin, and embedded in paraffin. Sections were stained with hematoxylin-eosin, toluidine blue, picro-mallory, and sirius red, and were immunostained for alpha-smooth muscle actin. Animals (males and females) exposed to severe protein restriction (0% protein) presented impairment of wound contraction. Inflammatory cells were present in higher amounts in the protein-restricted groups than in the 23% group. Extracellular matrix was poorly deposited in the severely restricted group (0%), but only mildly disturbed in the slightly restricted group (12%). Neovascularization was disturbed in both restricted groups. Our study demonstrates that animals exposed to slight protein restriction present disturbed wound healing, but animals exposed to severe protein restriction present impaired wound healing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".