MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319256886 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100005746

Canadian Association of Neurosciences Review: The Role of Dopamine Receptor Function in Neurodegenerative Diseases

2007· review· en· W2319256886 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Manon Lebel, Pierre Robinson, Michel Cyr

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscienceReceptorDopamineDopamine receptorPutamenDiseaseParkinson's diseaseMedicineBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dopamine (DA) receptors, which are heavily expressed in the caudate/putamen of the brain, represent the molecular target of several drugs used in the treatment of various neurological disorders, such as Parkinson's disease. Although most of the drugs are very effective in alleviating the symptoms associated with these conditions, their long-term utilization could lead to the development of severe side-effects. In addition to uncovering novel mediators of physiological DA receptor functions, recent research advances are suggesting a role of these receptors in toxic effects on neurons. For instance, accumulating evidence indicates that DA receptors, particularly D1 receptors, are central in the neuronal toxicity induced by elevated synaptic levels of DA. In this review, we will discuss recent findings on DA receptors as regulators of long term neuronal dysfunction and neurodegenerative processes.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.012

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
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

Citations15
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorFrench-language works237,207