MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099929136 · doi:10.3109/17518420903087558

Hitting a moving target: Basic mechanisms of recovery from acquired developmental brain injury

2009· review· en· W2099929136 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher C. Giza, Bryan Kolb, Neil G. Harris, Robert F. Asarnow, Mayumi L. Prins

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neurorehabilitation · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsNeuroplasticityTraumatic brain injuryNeuroscienceBrain damagePsychologyMedicineBrain developmentPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acquired brain injuries represent a major cause of disability in the pediatric population. Understanding responses to developmental acquired brain injuries requires knowledge of the neurobiology of normal development, age-at-injury effects and experience-dependent neuroplasticity. In the developing brain, full recovery cannot be considered as a return to the premorbid baseline, since ongoing maturation means that cerebral functioning in normal individuals will continue to advance. Thus, the recovering immature brain has to 'hit a moving target' to achieve full functional recovery, defined as parity with age-matched uninjured peers. This review will discuss the consequences of developmental injuries such as focal lesions, diffuse hypoxia and traumatic brain injury (TBI). Underlying cellular and physiological mechanisms relevant to age-at-injury effects will be described in considerable detail, including but not limited to alterations in neurotransmission, connectivity/network functioning, the extracellular matrix, response to oxidative stress and changes in cerebral metabolism. Finally, mechanisms of experience-dependent plasticity will be reviewed in conjunction with their effects on neural repair and recovery.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.292
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations74
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental NeurorehabilitationSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207