MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092861511 · doi:10.1139/y11-122

Choice of diet impacts the incidence of stroke-related symptoms in the spontaneously hypertensive stroke-prone rat model

2012· article· en· W2092861511 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Jennifer E. Slemmer, Kevin S. Shaughnessy, Adam P. Scanlan, Marva I. Sweeney, Katherine Gottschall‐Pass

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsStroke (engine)MedicineIncidence (geometry)Internal medicineEndocrinologyRat model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spontaneously hypertensive stroke-prone (SHRSP) rat is a commonly used model of cerebrovascular disease and hypertension. SHRSP rats have been shown to develop stroke-related symptoms (SRS) by age 14 weeks when fed a purified diet, such as AIN-93G, supplemented with 1% NaCl. We conducted a pathology pilot study to compare the incidence of SRS in SHRSP rats fed either AIN-93G (with 1% NaCl in drinking water) or commercially available rat chow (with 4% NaCl in the diet), starting at 8 weeks of age. These results prompted us to analyze data from 5 earlier feeding trials using SHRSP rats. Overall, we found that SHRSP rats fed AIN-93G purified diet for 8 or 17 weeks did not demonstrate SRS (n = 18), whereas all SHRSP rats fed lab chow exhibited SRS at age 15.1 ± 0.6 weeks (n = 23). In addition, SHRSP rats fed lab chow had decreased mass gain starting at age 13 weeks, as well as decreased feed efficiencies after the first 5 weeks of feeding (p < 0.05). In conclusion, our data suggest that diet composition is a major contributor to the onset of stroke in SHRSP rats and that diet choice should be critically evaluated based on endpoint measures in the SHRSP model.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicNeurological Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207