MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159079989 · doi:10.1093/alcalc/agn120

Update of Cell Damage Mechanisms in Thiamine Deficiency: Focus on Oxidative Stress, Excitotoxicity and Inflammation

2009· review· en· W2159079989 on OpenAlexaff
Alan S. Hazell, Roger F. Butterworth

Bibliographic record

VenueAlcohol and Alcoholism · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlcoholism and Thiamine Deficiency
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcitotoxicityOxidative stressInflammationNeuroscienceMechanism (biology)Glutamate receptorDiseaseMedicinePathologicalCell damageThiamineBioinformaticsBiologyPathologyImmunologyInternal medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thiamine deficiency (TD) is a well-established model of Wernicke's encephalopathy. Although the neurologic dysfunction and brain damage resulting from the biochemical consequences of TD is well characterized, the mechanism(s) that lead to the selective histological lesions characteristic of this disorder remain a mystery. Over the course of many years, various structural and functional changes have been identified that could lead to cell death in this disorder. However, despite a concerted effort to explain the consequences of TD in terms of these changes, our understanding of the pathophysiology of this disorder remains unclear. This review will focus on three of these processes, i.e. oxidative stress, glutamate-mediated excitotoxicity and inflammation and their role in selective vulnerability in TD. Since TD inhibits oxidative metabolism, a feature of many neurodegenerative disease states, it represents a model system with which to explore pathological mechanisms inherent in such maladies, with the potential to yield new insights into their possible treatment and prevention.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.306
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations166
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlcohol and AlcoholismSame topicAlcoholism and Thiamine DeficiencyFrench-language works237,207