MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081655770 · doi:10.1139/cjpp-2012-0173

Influence of treatment with quercetin on lipid parameters and oxidative stress of pregnant diabetic rats

2012· article· en· W2081655770 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Camila Pereira Braga, Ana Carolina Momentti, Fernando Barbosa Peixoto, Rafaela de Fátima Ferreira Baptista, Felipe André dos Santos, Fábio Henrique Fava, Ana Angélica Henrique Fernandes

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNatural Antidiabetic Agents Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuercetinOxidative stressDyslipidemiaDiabetes mellitusAntioxidantGlutathione peroxidaseStreptozotocinMedicineIntraperitoneal injectionInternal medicinePharmacologyLipid profileEndocrinologyChemistrySuperoxide dismutaseBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among the numerous coadjuvant therapies that could influence the incidence and progression of diabetic complications, antioxidants and flavonoids are currently being tested in clinical trials. We investigated the effect of quercetin on biochemical parameters in streptozotocin-induced (60 mg/kg body mass, by intraperitoneal injection) diabetic rats. A total of 32 female Wistar rats were distributed among 4 groups as follows: control (G1); control treated with quercetin (G2); diabetic (G3); and diabetic treated with quercetin (G4). Quercetin administered to pregnant diabetic rats controlled dyslipidemia and improved lipid profiles in diabetes mellitus, regulated oxidative stress by reducing the generation of lipid hydroperoxides, and increased the activity of the antioxidant enzyme glutathione peroxidase.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations25
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicNatural Antidiabetic Agents StudiesFrench-language works237,207