MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The microenvironment of injured and regenerating peripheral nerves

2000· review· en· W2148227281 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

VenueMuscle & Nerve · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegeneration (biology)PeripheralMedicinePeripheral nerve injuryNeuroscienceTrunkPeripheral nerveNitric oxideNerve injuryNeuropathic painSchwann cellPathologyAnatomyBiologyCell biologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Local events in the milieu of injured peripheral nerve trunks may have an important influence on the likelihood of regenerative success or the development of neuropathic pain. Injury-related changes in the microcirculation of this milieu have provided some evidence that axonal endbulbs, structures that form at the proximal end of transected axons, dump peptides and other molecules into the injury milieu where they may exert local actions, including those on microvessels. During a later phase of nerve repair, macrophage influx and pancellular proliferative events appear to develop in a coordinated fashion. Nitric oxide is probably an important and prominent player in the injured nerve trunk, both at early and later stages of the repair process. A better understanding of the injured peripheral nerve microenvironment may allow therapeutic approaches that can enhance regeneration and diminish pain.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.657

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.269 · 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