MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090939567 · doi:10.1159/000216177

In vitro and ex vivo Activities of CY216: Comparison with Other Low Molecular Weight Heparins

2009· article· en· W2090939567 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHaemostasis · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtease and Inhibitor Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsCanadian Red Cross Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntithromboticEx vivoIn vivoCoagulationChemistryThrombinPharmacologyAnticoagulantDiscovery and development of direct thrombin inhibitorsHeparinIn vitroBiochemistryMedicinePlateletImmunologyInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low molecular weight (LMW) heparins achieve their anticoagulant effects by inhibiting prothrombin activation, catalyzing endogenous thrombin inhibition, and binding thrombin. The extent of which each of the three actions of LMW heparins contributes to the antithrombotic effectiveness of LMW in man has not been defined. Several studies have reported that ex vivo anti-factor Xa activities of LMW heparins correlate with efficacy and potential haemorrhagic complications. However, critical review of the data suggests that anti-factor Xa assays are basically surrogate tests for the mass of LMW heparins in patients' plasmas rather than reliable estimates of total catalytic concentrations of LMW heparins. Antithrombotic effectiveness of LMW heparins probably reflects their ability to inhibit coagulation in vivo. If the last concept proves correct, then results of tests which directly assess the extents to which LMW heparins have suppressed in vivo coagulation may provide more reliable markers for their antithrombotic effectiveness or lack thereof.

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.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.233 · 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