MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133929474 · doi:10.1111/imr.12191

<scp>IL</scp>‐15: a central regulator of celiac disease immunopathology

2014· review· en· W2133929474 on OpenAlexafffund
Valérie Abadie, Bana Jabrì

Bibliographic record

VenueImmunological Reviews · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDigestive Diseases Reseach Core Center, University of ChicagoNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsLamina propriaDownregulation and upregulationPathogenesisImmunologyImmune systemBiologyImmunopathologyIntestinal mucosaDiseaseIntestinal epitheliumRegulatorAutoimmune diseaseAutoimmunityEpitheliumMedicinePathologyAntibodyGeneticsGeneInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interleukin-15 (IL-15) exerts many biological functions essential for the maintenance and function of multiple cell types. Although its expression is tightly regulated, IL-15 upregulation has been reported in many organ-specific autoimmune disorders. In celiac disease, an intestinal inflammatory disorder driven by gluten exposure, the upregulation of IL-15 expression in the intestinal mucosa has become a hallmark of the disease. Interestingly, because it is overexpressed both in the gut epithelium and in the lamina propria, IL-15 acts on distinct cell types and impacts distinct immune components and pathways to disrupt intestinal immune homeostasis. In this article, we review our current knowledge of the multifaceted roles of IL-15 with regard to the main immunological processes involved in the pathogenesis of celiac disease.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations215
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImmunological ReviewsSame topicCeliac Disease Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207