MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155351425 · doi:10.1093/brain/123.10.2118

The regenerative deficit of peripheral nerves in experimental diabetes: its extent, timing and possible mechanisms

2000· article· en· W2155351425 on OpenAlexafffund
James Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council Canada
KeywordsReinnervationMedicineCrush injuryRegeneration (biology)Sciatic nerveAxonDiabetes mellitusTibial nerveAnatomySurgeryInternal medicineEndocrinologyBiologyStimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diabetes mellitus is reported to impair peripheral nerve regeneration, but the extent, timing and selectivity of the deficit is unclear. We studied regeneration of motor and sensory fibres in mice with experimental diabetes induced using streptozotocin (STZ). The mouse model featured several advantages over its counterpart in rats given STZ, while exhibiting the expected slowing of motor conduction velocity. Serial studies addressed fibre regrowth for up to 10 weeks after both sciatic nerve crush injury and complete sciatic nerve transection. Following nerve crush, there was a delay in motor fibre reinnervation of tibial innervated interosseous muscles of diabetics, manifest as a slow recovery of the M-wave recorded from these muscles. Despite an apparent recovery in M-waves by 6 weeks, this was not accounted for by restitution of tibial axon numbers in diabetic mice. Histological studies distal to crush or transection identified substantial delays in the regrowth of the numbers and calibre of regenerating myelinated fibres in diabetics for up to 8-10 weeks. Moreover, this delay was observed in both the tibial (largely motor) and sural (non-motor) distal sciatic branches. There was an associated delay in macrophage invasion and their later resorption in the diabetic nerves, indicating that a potential mechanism of impaired regeneration might be abnormal macrophage participation in nerve repair. Our findings indicate that during nerve regeneration, diabetic motor and sensory fibres have substantial and persistent deficits in regrowth associated with abnormalities in macrophage participation.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations125
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207