MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148972109 · doi:10.1186/2197-425x-2-s1-o13

0450. Systemic dysregulation of the angiopoietin-1/2 system in adults undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass (CBP)

2014· article· en· W2148972109 on OpenAlexaff
Emmanuel Charbonney, Elizabeth Wilcox, Yuexin Shan, Pablo Pérez d’Empaire, Amanda Dugal, Michael Glogauer, GD Rubenfeld, Susan Sutherland, C Lilles, Claúdia C. dos Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueIntensive Care Medicine Experimental · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndothelial activationEndotheliumCardiopulmonary bypassAngiogenesisInflammationAngiopoietinPathophysiologyEndothelial dysfunctionPlatelet activationInternal medicineImmunologyPlateletVascular endothelial growth factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Systemic capillary leak syndrome after cardiopulmonary bypass (CBP) is a well-known phenomenon, accompanied by interstitial fluid accumulation and inflammation, and can lead to end-organ failure or increased hospital length of stay (LOS). The pathophysiology responsible for capillary leak involves activation of inflammation, complement, and coagulation. The endothelium plays a central role in the activation of coagulation, and activated/dysregulated endothelium contributes to microvascular leak and enhanced adhesion of leukocytes. However, the characterization and measurement of endothelial dysregulation is not well established. Angiopoietin-1 (Ang-1) and -2 (Ang-2) are molecules implicated in angiogenesis and regulation of endothelial permeability. Their differential changes of expression could be a surrogate to quantify endothelial dysregulation after CBP.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0070.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntensive Care Medicine ExperimentalSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207