MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166852172 · doi:10.2215/cjn.00100106

Properties Permitting the Renal Cortex to Be the Oxygen Sensor for the Release of Erythropoietin

2006· review· en· W2166852172 on OpenAlexaff
Mitchell L. Halperin, Surinder Cheema‐Dhadli, Shih‐Hua Lin, Kamel S. Kamel

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythropoietin and Anemia Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineErythropoietinHemoglobinOxygen–haemoglobin dissociation curveRenal cortexRenal blood flowBlood flowOxygen transportOxygenInternal medicineUrologyKidneyAnemiaEndocrinologyCardiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The PO2 at this site where erythropoietin release is regulated should vary only when the hemoglobin concentration changes in capillary blood. The kidney cortex is an ideal location for this O2 sensor for four reasons. First, it extracts a small proportion of the oxygen that is delivered in each liter of blood; this makes the PO2 signal easier to recognize. Second, there is a constant ratio of the work performed (consumption of O2) to the renal blood flow rate (delivery of O2). Third, the high renal blood flow rate improves diffusion of O2 from capillaries to this O2 receptor. Fourth, a high renal cortical PCO2 prevents an additional shift of the O2:hemoglobin dissociation curve by other factors from being a confounding variable. This suggests that the GFR and the renal blood flow rate should be examined in patients with unexplained anemia or erythrocytosis.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations26
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicErythropoietin and Anemia TreatmentFrench-language works237,207