MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2310154177 · doi:10.3791/53731

A Magnetic Microbead Occlusion Model to Induce Ocular Hypertension-Dependent Glaucoma in Mice

2016· article· en· W2310154177 on OpenAlexafffund
Yoko Itō, Nicolás Belforte, Jorge L. Cueva Vargas, Adriana Di Polo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCardiff UniversityVanderbilt University
KeywordsGlaucomaOcular hypertensionIntraocular pressureMedicineTrabecular meshworkMicrobead (research)OphthalmologyBiomedical engineeringCorneaOcclusionSurgeryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of rodent models of glaucoma has been essential to understand the molecular mechanisms that underlie the pathophysiology of this multifactorial neurodegenerative disease. With the advent of numerous transgenic mouse lines, there is increasing interest in inducible murine models of ocular hypertension. Here, we present an occlusion model of glaucoma based on the injection of magnetic microbeads into the anterior chamber of the eye using a modified microneedle with a facetted bevel. The magnetic microbeads are attracted to the iridocorneal angle using a handheld magnet to block the drainage of aqueous humour from the anterior chamber. This disruption in aqueous dynamics results in a steady elevation of intraocular pressure, which subsequently leads to the loss of retinal ganglion cells, as observed in human glaucoma patients. The microbead occlusion model presented in this manuscript is simple compared to other inducible models of glaucoma and also highly effective and reproducible. Importantly, the modifications presented here minimize common issues that often arise in occlusion models. First, the use of a bevelled glass microneedle prevents backflow of microbeads and ensures that minimal damage occurs to the cornea during the injection, thus reducing injury-related effects. Second, the use of magnetic microbeads ensures the ability to attract most beads to the iridocorneal angle, effectively reducing the number of beads floating in the anterior chamber avoiding contact with other structures (e.g., iris, lens). Lastly, the use of a handheld magnet allows flexibility when handling the small mouse eye to efficiently direct the magnetic microbeads and ensure that there is little reflux of the microbeads from the eye when the microneedle is withdrawn. In summary, the microbead occlusion mouse model presented here is a powerful investigative tool to study neurodegenerative changes that occur during the onset and progression of glaucoma.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations71
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207