MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152856916 · doi:10.1002/jemt.1119

Microglia in neuroregeneration

2001· review· en· W2152856916 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy Research and Technique · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilAlzheimer SocietyÅke Wiberg Stiftelse
KeywordsNeuroregenerationMicrogliaNeuroscienceBiologyMedicineNeuroprotectionInternal medicineInflammation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microglia has the potential to produce and release a range of factors that directly and/or indirectly promote regeneration in the injured nervous system. The overwhelming evidence indicates, however, that this potential is generally not expressed in vivo. Activated microglia may enhance neuronal degeneration following axotomy, thereby counteracting functional recovery. Microglia does not seem to contribute significantly to axonal outgrowth after peripheral nerve injury, since this process proceeds uneventful even if perineuronal microglia is eliminated. The phagocytic phenotype of microglia is highly suppressed during Wallerian degeneration in the central nervous system. Therefore, microglia is incapable of rapid and efficient removal of myelin debris and its putative growth inhibitory components. In this way, microglia may contribute to regeneration failure in the central nervous system. Structural and temporal correlations are compatible with participation by perineuronal microglia in axotomy-induced shedding of presynaptic terminals, but direct evidence for such participation is lacking. Currently, the most promising case for a promoting effect on neural repair by activated microglia appears to be as a mediator of collateral sprouting, at least in certain brain areas. However, final proof for a critical role of microglia in these instances is still lacking. Results from in vitro studies demonstrate that microglia can develop a regeneration supportive phenotype. Altering the microglial involvement following neural injury from a typically passive or even counterproductive state and into a condition where these cells are actively supporting regeneration and plasticity is, therefore, an exciting challenge and probably a realistic goal.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.224
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.239 · 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