MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177414021 · doi:10.1017/s0954422415000128

Murine models provide insight to the development of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease

2015· article· en· W2177414021 on OpenAlexafffund
Danielle Reid, Bertus Eksteen

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition Research Reviews · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsFatty liverSteatohepatitisContext (archaeology)Insulin resistanceMetabolic syndromeCirrhosisMedicineDiseaseObesityBioinformaticsLiver diseaseAlcoholic liver diseaseHepatocellular carcinomaInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Associated with the obesity epidemic, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has become the leading liver disease in North America. Approximately 30 % of patients with NAFLD may develop non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) that can lead to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Frequently animal models are used to help identify underlying factors contributing to NAFLD including insulin resistance, dysregulated lipid metabolism and mitochondrial stress. However, studying the inflammatory, progressive nature of NASH in the context of obesity has proven to be a challenge in mice. Although the development of effective treatment strategies for NAFLD and NASH is gaining momentum, the field is hindered by a lack of a concise animal model that reflects the development of liver disease during obesity and the metabolic syndrome. Therefore, selecting an animal model to study NAFLD or NASH must be done carefully to ensure the optimal application. The most widely used animal models have been reviewed highlighting their advantages and disadvantages to studying NAFLD and NASH specifically in the context of obesity.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.357
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.084 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations25
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition Research ReviewsSame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207