MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085907625 · doi:10.1210/en.2006-0115

Ciliary Neural Trophic Factor: Mimicking Leptin’s Effects in Skeletal Muscle?

2006· letter· en· W2085907625 on OpenAlexaff
David J. Dyck

Bibliographic record

VenueEndocrinology · 2006
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicRegulation of Appetite and Obesity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternal medicineEndocrinologyLeptinTrophic levelSkeletal muscleMedicineBiologyObesityEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a clear association between obesity and the development of insulin resistance; however, the mechanisms underlying this relationship are unclear. In both humans and rodents, there is a strong correlation between abnormal fatty acid (FA) metabolism and the development of insulin resistance in skeletal muscle, the largest tissue by mass regulated by insulin. In addition to being a major sink for circulating glucose, skeletal muscle takes up significant quantities of plasma FA, for either energy production or storage. The accumulation of im triacylglycerol (TAG) (1, 2) as well as an impaired capacity to oxidize FA (3) are correlated to the presence of insulin resistance. However, elevated TAG stores may only be a marker of dysfunctional FA metabolism, and accumulation of more reactive lipid species, such as diacylglycerol (DAG) and ceramide, is likely to be responsible for the impaired insulin signaling. Interestingly, and perhaps somewhat surprisingly, the elevation of circulating lipids need not be present chronically to induce insulin resistance. Infusion of a lipid emulsion for several hours in humans results in increases in muscle DAG content (4) and the acute development of insulin resistance (5, 6).

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)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0130.008
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEndocrinologySame topicRegulation of Appetite and ObesityFrench-language works237,207