MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188307099 · doi:10.1002/eji.201546022

Challenges in the characterization of neutrophil extracellular traps: The truth is in the details

2015· letter· en· W2188307099 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul H. Naccache, Maria J. Fernandes

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Immunology · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicNeutrophil, Myeloperoxidase and Oxidative Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchArthritis Society
KeywordsNeutrophil extracellular trapsBiologyExtracellularCell biologyChromatinImmune systemProgrammed cell deathImmunologyNeuroscienceComputational biologyInflammationGeneticsGeneApoptosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neutrophil extracellular traps play a key role in defense against extracellular pathogens. The release of these chromatin structures, that contain a combination of cytoplasmic and granule proteins, is known as NETosis, a regulated cell death modality typical of neutrophils. NETosis is induced by pathogens as well as other stimuli such as activated platelets. Our understanding of the molecular events underlying this phenomenon remains incomplete. The currently used experimental approaches to study NETs are semi-quantitative, subjective in nature, and low throughput, rendering it difficult to compare results between laboratories. This is highlighted in two articles published in this issue of the European Journal of Immunology which present what appear to be contradicting results on NET formation. Considering the extensive research on NETosis and the importance of this phenomenon in the immune response, we find it timely to briefly review the lacunae in the most commonly used methods to investigate NETosis. The impact these technical difficulties have on the advancement of our knowledge in this field as well as potential solutions are also discussed.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0070.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.177 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations39
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of ImmunologySame topicNeutrophil, Myeloperoxidase and Oxidative MechanismsFrench-language works237,207