MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147005799 · doi:10.1159/000101344

Angiogenesis in Lung Development, Injury and Repair: Implications for Chronic Lung Disease of Prematurity

2007· review· en· W2147005799 on OpenAlexafffund
Bernard Thébaud

Bibliographic record

VenueNeonatology · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsBronchopulmonary dysplasiaLungAngiogenesisMedicineLung diseaseDiseasePathologyInternal medicineBiologyPregnancyGestational age

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the initial description of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) 40 years ago, advances in perinatal care have allowed the survival of infants that are more immature. The disease has not disappeared, but it now affects infants with undeveloped distal airspaces, resulting in an arrest of alveolar development. The histological changes that occur during normal lung development are well described, but little is known about the signaling mechanisms that regulate saccular and alveolar development. Understanding how alveoli and the underlying capillary network develop and how these mechanisms are disrupted in preterm infants with BPD is critical to develop efficient and effective therapies for lung diseases characterized by alveolar damage. This brief review focuses on the recently recognized role of angiogenic growth factors during normal alveolar development, injury and repair with a particular emphasis on the vascular endothelial growth factor.

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 score0.008

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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.378 · 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

Citations137
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeonatologySame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207