MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138070812 · doi:10.1017/s1461145702003097

Cytokines as a stressor: implications for depressive illness

2002· review· en· W2138070812 on OpenAlexaff
Hymie Anisman, Shawn Hayley, Nicolas P. Turrin, Zul Merali

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStressorPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stressful events have been implicated in the provocation of depressive illness. Inasmuch as immunological challenge, and particularly cytokine administration, engender neuroendocrine and central neurochemical changes reminiscent of those provoked by psychogenic stressors, it was suggested that immune activation may also contribute to affective illness. The present report provides a brief overview of the neurochemical sequelae of acute and repeated interleukin-1beta (IL-1beta), tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) and IL-2 treatment, describes some of the synergisms associated with these treatments, as well as their potential interactions with psychogenic stressors. In addition, a discussion is provided concerning the fact that cytokines, like stressors, may have time-dependent proactive effects, so that re-exposure to the treatments provoke greatly augmented neurochemical changes (sensitization). Given that the effects of cytokines are evident within hypothalamic, as well as extrahypothalamic sites, including various limbic regions, it is suggested that cytokines may impact on emotional changes, including depression.

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)0.001
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations106
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of NeuropsychopharmacologySame topicStress Responses and CortisolFrench-language works237,207