MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144326376 · doi:10.2460/javma.2005.226.712

Comparison of nonspecific indications and quantitative methods for the assessment of insulin resistance in horses and ponies

2005· review· en· W2144326376 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Equine Medical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsulin resistanceInsulinInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyDyslipidemiaMedicineAdipose tissueCarbohydrate metabolismSepsisInsulin receptorBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I resistance (IR) is a component of certain metabolic conditions and a risk factor for the development of several diseases of humans and domestic animals, including Equus caballus (horses and ponies). In humans, those conditions and diseases include diabetes mellitus type 2, obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension and stroke, surgery or injury, stress, sepsis, aging and longevity, coronary heart disease, polycystic ovary syndrome, cancer, inflammation, oxidative stress, and endotoxemia. Insulin resistance is a component of several of the same conditions and diseases in horses (Table 1). Insulin resistance is regarded generally as a decrease in tissue responses to insulin and more specifically as a decrease in insulin-mediated uptake of glucose by the liver, muscles, and adipose tissues. These responses to insulin are usually measured as insulin sensitivity, so IR may simply be regarded as the inverse of low sensitivity of insulin receptors on the cell surface. In addition to glucose transport into a cell, however, IR may involve ineffectiveness as a result of various disruptions of intracellular glucose metabolism. Controversy about IR has been provoked by the hypothesis that genetic predispositions are exacerbated by diets high in carbohydrate content. Notable examples are the high-carbohydrate, low-fat diets recommended to prevent coronary heart disease in humans and grain-molasses concentrates for horses. Allusions to IR in the medical literature on horses have been based on various kinds of evidence, ranging from speculative analogies via common associations to various ambiguous indications on the basis of plasma concentrations of glucose and insulin and to specific quantitative measurements that separate function of pancreatic β-cells from peripheral actions of insulin. Our objective was to evaluate types of evidence that have been used to document IR in horses and ponies and thereby identify opportunities for improvement in the assessment of IR, especially as it relates to nutritional recommendations for the treatment and prevention of clinical conditions, the avoidance of nutritional risk factors, and the promotion of production and performance.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.302
GPT teacher head0.603
Teacher spread0.301 · 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