MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146405130 · doi:10.1139/h02-011

The Putative Roles of Adenosine in Insulin- and Exercise-Mediated Regulation of Glucose Transport and Glycogen Metabolism in Skeletal Muscle

2002· review· en· W2146405130 on OpenAlexaff
Farah S. L. Thong, Terry E. Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Applied Physiology · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkeletal muscleGlycogenInternal medicineEndocrinologyCarbohydrate metabolismInsulinAdenosineGlycogen synthaseGlucose uptakeGlucose transporterBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Skeletal muscle is the primary site of whole-body glucose disposal and is vital in determining the overall insulin sensitivity and carbohydrate management. Insulin and physical exercise are important stimuli for muscle glucose transport and glycogen metabolism. While it is known that both insulin and contraction stimulate muscle glucose uptake and glycogen metabolism, the post-receptor mechanisms are not completely understood. Local metabolic factors, such as adenosine, have been suggested to play a role in insulin and contraction regulation of carbohydrate metabolism in skeletal muscle. While adenosine has clearly been shown to potentiate insulin-stimulated glucose transport in adipocytes and heart muscle, its role in carbohydrate metabolism in skeletal muscle is less clear, with numerous diverging findings published to date. This review article summarizes findings on the putative roles of adenosine in insulin and exercise-mediated regulation of carbohydrate metabolism and the signalling pathways proposed to be central to these metabolic stimuli in skeletal muscle.

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 score0.010

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations33
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Applied PhysiologySame topicMetabolism, Diabetes, and CancerFrench-language works237,207