MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064781552 · doi:10.1016/s0924-9338(09)70792-8

Increased Serum Neurotrophin-4/5 Levels in Bipolar Disorder

2009· article· en· W2064781552 on OpenAlexaff
Júlio Cesar Walz, Pedro Vieira da Silva Magalhães, Larriany Maria Falsin Giglio, Angelo Batista da Cunha, Laura Stertz, Gabriel R. Fries, Ana C. Andreazza, Flávio Kapczinski

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBipolar disorderManiaNeurotrophinMoodNeurotrophin-3Depression (economics)PsychologyInternal medicineBipolar I disorderDopaminergicMood disordersCentral nervous systemEndocrinologyPsychiatryMedicineNeurotrophic factorsBrain-derived neurotrophic factorDopamineAnxietyReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurotrophins are central to several aspects of central nervous system function, and emerging evidence links these growth factors to mood disorders. The purpose of this study was to investigate serum neurotrophin-4/5 (NT-4/5) levels in patients with bipolar disorder, both within mood episodes and in euthymia. Patients with bipolar I disorder (n=154) and controls (n=30) had their NT-4/5 serum levels assayed using an ELISA. Levels of NT-4/5 levels were significantly higher in bipolar disorder patients than in controls; NT-4/5 levels were increased in mania, depression and euthymia, but not significantly different between BD mood states. As far as are aware, this is the first study showing NT-4/5 immunocontent alterations in bipolar disorder. A tentative explanation would be that NT-4/5 increases is compensating for ongoing oxidative damage in dopaminergic neurons.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.686

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207