MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of a predictive model for negative microvascular outcomes in the metabolic syndrome

2009· article· en· W2291964516 on OpenAlexaff
Jefferson C. Frisbee, Adam G. Goodwill, Milinda E. James, Robert W. Brock, John M. Hollander, Stephanie J. Frisbee

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicApelin-related biomedical research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society for Exercise Physiology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetabolic syndromeMedicineInsulin resistanceInternal medicineEndothelial dysfunctionEndocrinologyPhysiologyDiabetes mellitusInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evolution of the metabolic syndrome is a multi‐factorial process with a constellation of pathologies developing over time. Consequently, poor vascular outcomes in the metabolic syndrome are also temporally distributed, and an integrated understanding of these outcomes requires information regarding their sequence of development. To address this, we examined development of the metabolic syndrome, systemic disease biomarkers, and negative vascular structural/functional outcomes in obese Zucker rats at 6‐7, 9‐10, 12‐13, 15‐16 and 19‐20 weeks. For these initial procedures and model development, no interventional strategy against either the metabolic syndrome or the poor outcomes was employed. Prior to development of vascular dysfunction, endothelial arachidonic acid metabolism was altered toward TxA 2 production; predicted by insulin resistance. This outcome was followed by an increase in markers of systemic inflammation, resulting in systemic oxidant stress and reduced vascular NO bioavailability. Immunohistochemistry suggested an increased venular adhesion marker expression (ICAM‐1, VCAM‐1) associated with the loss of NO bioavailability and this contributed significantly to a reduction in microvessel density. Taken together, these data begin to provide a temporally relevant, predictive model for poor microvascular outcomes in the metabolic syndrome. (NIH R01 DK64668, AHA EIA 0740129N)

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicApelin-related biomedical researchFrench-language works237,207