MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114843994 · doi:10.1186/1471-2377-2-2

Delayed minocycline but not delayed mild hypothermia protects against embolic stroke

2002· article· en· W2114843994 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Xu Wang, Tao Yang, Raza Noor, Ashfaq Shuaib

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Neurology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMinocyclineHypothermiaNeuroprotectionAnesthesiaIschemiaInfarctionStroke (engine)NeurologyCardiologyPharmacologyMyocardial infarctionAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory reactions occurring in the brain after ischemia may contribute to secondary damage. In the present study, effects of minocycline, an anti-inflammatory agent, alone or in combination with mild hypothermia on focal embolic cerebral ischemia have been examined. METHODS: Focal ischemic injury was induced by embolizing a preformed clot into the middle cerebral artery (MCA). Infarction volume was measured at 48 h after the injury. Mortality was also recorded. RESULTS: Delayed administration of minocycline alone or delayed minocycline plus delayed mild hypothermia reduced the infarction volume significantly. However, delayed mild hypothermia alone was not protective and delayed mild hypothermia in combination with minocycline did not show any additive effect. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that minocycline is beneficial in focal ischemic brain injury, and the lack of the enhanced neuroprotection may be due to the brief exposure to hypothermia.

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: Bench or experimental
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)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations57
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC NeurologySame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207