MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063821082 · doi:10.1089/ars.2007.1732

ROS Signaling in Systemic and Cellular Responses to Chronic Intermittent Hypoxia

2007· review· en· W2063821082 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nanduri R. Prabhakar, Ganesh Kumar, Jayasri Nanduri, Gregg L. Semenza

Bibliographic record

VenueAntioxidants and Redox Signaling · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsHypoxia (environmental)Carotid bodyIntermittent hypoxiaReactive oxygen speciesMedicinePhenotypeAdverse effectSignal transductionNeuroscienceBiologyBioinformaticsInternal medicineElectrophysiologyChemistryOxygenCell biologyGeneObstructive sleep apnea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic intermittent hypoxia (CIH) is a common and life-threatening condition that occurs in many different diseases, including sleep-disordered breathing manifested as recurrent apneas. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) have been identified as one of the causative factors in a variety of morbidities. The purpose of this article is to present a brief overview of recent studies implicating a critical role of ROS in evoking phenotypic adverse effects in experimental models of CIH and in patients with recurrent apneas. In experimental models, CIH activates ROS signaling that contributes to several systemic and cellular responses that include (a) altered carotid body function, the primary chemoreceptor for sensing changes in arterial blood O2; (b) elevated blood pressures; (c) enhanced release of transmitters and neurotrophic factors; (d) altered sleep and cognitive behaviors; and (e) activation of second-messenger pathways and transcriptional factors. Considerable evidence indicates elevated ROS levels in patients experiencing CIH as a consequence of recurrent apneas. Antioxidants not only prevent many of the CIH-evoked physiologic and cellular responses in experimental settings, but more important, they also offer protection against certain phenotypic adverse effects in patients with recurrent apneas, suggesting their potential therapeutic value in alleviating certain morbidities associated with recurrent apneas.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.341
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

Citations145
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntioxidants and Redox SignalingSame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207