MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157698190 · doi:10.1002/ibd.21556

Is metabolic stress a common denominator in inflammatory bowel disease?

2010· review· en· W2157698190 on OpenAlexaff
Ida Schoultz, Johan D. Söderholm, Derek M. McKay

Bibliographic record

VenueInflammatory Bowel Diseases · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and ImmunityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflammationDysbiosisEnterocyteInflammatory bowel diseaseImmunologyBarrier functionDiseaseGut floraBiologyMedicinePathologyInternal medicineCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The enteric epithelium represents the major boundary between the outside world and the body, and in the colon it is the interface between the host and a vast and diverse microbiota. A common feature of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is decreased epithelial barrier function, and while a cause-and-effect relationship can be debated, prolonged loss of epithelial barrier function (whether this means the ability to sense bacteria or exclude them) would contribute to inflammation. While there are undoubtedly individual nuances in IBD, we review data in support of metabolic stress--that is, perturbed mitochondrial function--in the enterocyte as a contributing factor to the initiation of inflammation and relapses in IBD. The postulate is presented that metabolic stress, which can arise as a consequence of a variety of stimuli (e.g., infection, bacterial dysbiosis, and inflammation also), will reduce epithelial barrier function and perturb the enterocyte-commensal flora relationship and suggest that means to negate enterocytic metabolic stress should be considered as a prophylactic or adjuvant therapy in IBD.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations30
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInflammatory Bowel DiseasesSame topicGut microbiota and healthFrench-language works237,207