MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2248711400

Expression of cystatin C in the rat endometrium during the peri-implantation period

2003· article· en· W2248711400 on OpenAlexaff
CE Quinn, D.G. Simmons, T. G. Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueQueensland's institutional digital repository (The University of Queensland) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive System and Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEndometriumEstrogenCystatin CEmbryoEndocrinologyAndrologyInternal medicinePregnancyCystatinUterusMedicineCell biology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endometrial receptivity for embryo implantation in the rat is a transient state occurring on day 5 of pregnancy or pseudopregnancy and is controlled by estrogen and progesterone. To identify genes potentially involved in receptivity, a uterine cDNA library was screened. An interesting pattern for Cystatin C (Cst3) expression was discovered with a peak in abundance just prior to embryo implantation (day 4 of pregnancy) followed by a significant drop the following day when implantation is initiated. Histology localized Cst3 mRNA and CST3 protein to the glandular epithelium on day 4 of pregnancy suggesting that it is secreted into the uterine lumen at this time. In ovariectomized rats endometrial Cst3 mRNA levels decreased within 3 h of treatment with estradiol; this effect was inhibited by the anti-estrogen, ICI 182, 780. The data suggest that the endometrial expression of the cysteine protease inhibitor, Cst3, is modulated by estrogen during the peri-implantation period. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQueensland's institutional digital repository (The University of Queensland)Same topicReproductive System and PregnancyFrench-language works237,207