MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102572041 · doi:10.1016/j.krcp.2013.01.003

Transforming growth factor-beta and the glomerular filtration barrier

2013· article· en· W2102572041 on OpenAlexafffund
Ayesha Ghayur, Peter J. Margetts

Bibliographic record

VenueKidney Research and Clinical Practice · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsMedicineUrologyRenal functionBETA (programming language)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing burden of chronic kidney disease worldwide and recent advancements in the understanding of pathologic events leading to kidney injury have opened up new potential avenues for therapies to further diminish progression of kidney disease by targeting the glomerular filtration barrier and reducing proteinuria. The glomerular filtration barrier is affected by many different metabolic and immune-mediated injuries. Glomerular endothelial cells, the glomerular basement membrane, and podocytes-the three components of the filtration barrier-work together to prevent the loss of protein and at the same time allow passage of water and smaller molecules. Damage to any of the components of the filtration barrier can initiate proteinuria and renal fibrosis. Transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β) is a pleiotropic cytokine strongly associated with the fibrogenic response. It has a known role in tubulointerstitial fibrosis. In this review we will highlight what is known about TGF-β and how it interacts with the components of glomerular filtration barrier and causes loss of function and proteinuria.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations38
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKidney Research and Clinical PracticeSame topicChronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesFrench-language works237,207