MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068462003 · doi:10.1097/wco.0b013e328337f451

Mechanisms of cerebral edema in traumatic brain injury: therapeutic developments

2010· review· en· W2068462003 on OpenAlexaff
James Donkin, Robert Vink

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Neurology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBarrier Structure and Function Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaChild and Family Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTraumatic brain injuryCerebral edemaEdemaBlood–brain barrierBrain edemaInflammationAnesthesiaNeuroscienceCentral nervous systemInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Although a number of factors contribute to the high mortality and morbidity associated with traumatic brain injury (TBI), the development of cerebral edema with brain swelling remains the most significant predictor of outcome. The present review summarizes the most recent advances in the understanding of mechanisms associated with development of posttraumatic cerebral edema, and highlights areas of therapeutic promise. RECENT FINDINGS: Despite the predominance of cytotoxic (or cellular) edema in the first week after traumatic brain injury, brain swelling can only occur with addition of water to the cranial vault from the vasculature. As such, regulation of blood-brain barrier permeability has become a focus of recent research seeking to manage brain edema. Aquaporins, matrix metalloproteinases and vasoactive inflammatory agents have emerged as potential mediators of cerebral edema following traumatic brain injury. In particular, kinins (bradykinins) and tachykinins (substance P) seem to play an active physiological role in modulating blood-brain barrier permeability after trauma. Substance P neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists show particular promise as novel therapeutic agents. SUMMARY: Attenuating blood-brain barrier permeability has become a promising approach to managing brain edema and associated swelling given that increases in cranial water content can only be derived from the vasculature. Inflammation, both classical and neurogenic, offers a number of attractive targets.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations352
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in NeurologySame topicBarrier Structure and Function StudiesFrench-language works237,207