MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156410468 · doi:10.2174/1567202043480251

Molecular Targets to Promote Central Nervous System Regeneration

2004· review· en· W2156410468 on OpenAlexaff
Gino B. Ferraro, Yazan Z. Alabed, Alyson E. Fournier

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Neurovascular Research · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegeneration (biology)NeuroscienceAxonNeuroregenerationOlfactory ensheathing gliaCentral nervous systemMyelinBiologyRemyelinationOligodendrocyteTransplantationNeurotrophinGlial scarStem cellMedicineCell biologyReceptorAstrocyte

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trauma in the adult mammalian central nervous system (CNS) results in devastating clinical consequences due to the failure of injured axons to spontaneously regenerate. This regenerative failure can be attributed to both a lack of positive cues and to the presence of inhibitory cues that actively prevent regeneration. Substantial progress has been made in elucidating the molecular identity of negative cues present at the CNS injury site following injury. In the past several years, multiple myelin-associated inhibitors including Nogo, Myelin-associated glycoprotein and Oligodendrocyte-myelin glycoprotein have been characterized. Furthermore a neuronal receptor complex and several intracellular substrates leading to outgrowth inhibition have been identified. Rapid progress has also been made in identifying the role of neurotrophins and other positive cues in promoting axonal regrowth. The most recent advances in our understanding of positive stimuli for axon regeneration come from transplantation studies at the CNS lesion site. A number of artificial substrates, tissues, and cells including fetal cells, neural stem cells, Schwann cells and olfactory-ensheathing cells have been tested in animal models of CNS injury. Based on our expanded knowledge of inhibitory influences and on the positive characteristics of various transplants, a number of interventions have been tested to promote recovery in models of CNS trauma. These advances represent the first steps in developing a viable therapy to promote axon regeneration following CNS trauma.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.254 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations18
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Neurovascular ResearchSame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207