MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2144344191 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100016516

Why is ALS so Difficult to Treat?

2014· review· en· W2144344191 on OpenAlexaffvenue
John Turnbull

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisDiseasePathogenesisOptimismMedicineNeuroscienceClinical phenotypeIntensive care medicineBioinformaticsPhenotypeBiologyPsychologyImmunologyPathologyGeneticsPsychotherapistGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is proving intractable. Difficulties in pre-clinical studies contribute in small measure to this futility, but the chief reason for failure is an inadequate understanding of disease pathogenesis. Many acquired and inherited processes have been advanced as potential causes of ALS but, while they may predispose to disease, it seems increasingly likely that none leads directly to ALS. Rather, two recent overlapping considerations, both involving aberrant protein homeostasis, may provide a better explanation for a common disease phenotype and a common terminal pathogenesis. If so, therapeutic approaches will need to be altered and carefully nuanced, since protein homeostasis is essential and highly conserved. Nonetheless, these considerations provide new optimism in a difficult disease which has hitherto defied treatment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research→French-language works237,207→