Impairment of rectal afferent mechanosensitivity in experimental diabetes in the rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diabetes mellitus results in neuropathy of both somatic and visceral nerves. In diabetic patients with faecal incontinence, impaired rectal sensory function, manifested by a decreased sensitivity to balloon distention is common. This may contribute to unawareness of rectal filling and incontinence. There has been little study to date of visceral mechanosensation in experimental diabetes however. We hypothesized that experimental diabetes would impair mechanosensitivity in rectal afferent nerves. Diabetes was induced in rats by i.p. injection of streptozotocin. Controls were injected with citrate. In vitro recordings were performed from rectal afferent nerves innervating isolated segments of rectum. In control animals, three distinct populations of mechanosensitive fibres were identified. Low threshold fibres responded at low intensity stretch and reached a maximal firing rate at less than 10 g of stretch (11/24 units). Wide dynamic sensitivity units responded at low intensity stretch (<2 g) but encoded stimulus intensity in a linear fashion up to 20 g (12/24 units). High threshold units responded at greater than 5 g. In diabetic animals there was a near complete loss of LT units (1/19) and most (16/29) had properties similar to WD units. However, their response threshold was significantly increased. Firing rates in response to maximal distention did not change in diabetic animals. We conclude that experimental diabetes selectively affects the detection of low threshold 'physiologic' rectal distention, such as that which might occur during rectal filling, prior to defaecation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".