MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125386218 · doi:10.3390/pathogens2010177

Antimicrobial Human β-Defensins in the Colon and Their Role in Infectious and Non-Infectious Diseases

2013· review· en· W2125386218 on OpenAlexaff
Eduardo R. Cobo, Kris Chadee

Bibliographic record

VenuePathogens · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntimicrobial Peptides and Activities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDefensinBeta defensinInnate immune systemAntimicrobialAntimicrobial peptidesBiologyMicrobiologyImmune systemPaneth cellImmunityImmunologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)In vivoDiseaseMedicineSmall intestinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

β-defensins are small cationic antimicrobial peptides secreted by diverse cell types including colonic epithelial cells. Human β-defensins form an essential component of the intestinal lumen in innate immunity. The defensive mechanisms of β-defensins include binding to negatively charged microbial membranes that cause cell death and chemoattraction of immune cells. The antimicrobial activity of β-defensin is well reported in vitro against several enteric pathogens and in non-infectious processes such as inflammatory bowel diseases, which alters β-defensin production. However, the role of β-defensin in vivo in its interaction with other immune components in host defense against bacteria, viruses and parasites with more complex membranes is still not well known. This review focuses on the latest findings regarding the role of β-defensin in relevant human infectious and non-infectious diseases of the colonic mucosa. In addition, we summarize the most significant aspects of β-defensin and its antimicrobial role in a variety of disease processes.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations72
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePathogensSame topicAntimicrobial Peptides and ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207