Tracking gastrointestinal transit of solids in aged rats as pharmacological models of chronic dysmotility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dysmotility in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract often leads to impaired transit of luminal contents leading to symptoms of diarrhea or constipation. The aim of this research was to develop a technique using high resolution X-ray imaging to study pharmacologically induced aged rat models of chronic GI dysmotility that mimic accelerated transit (diarrhea) or constipation. The 5-hydroxytryptamine type 4 (5-HT4 ) receptor agonist prucalopride was used to accelerate transit, and the opioid agonist loperamide was used to delay transit. METHODS: Male rats (18 months) were given 0, 1, 2, or 4 mg/kg/day prucalopride or loperamide (in dimethyl sulfoxide, DMSO) for 7 days by continuous 7-day dosing. To determine the GI region-specific effect, transit of six metallic beads was tracked over 12 h using high resolution X-ray imaging. An established rating scale was used to classify GI bead location in vivo and the distance beads had propagated from the caecum was confirmed postmortem. KEY RESULTS: Loperamide (1 mg/kg) slowed stomach emptying and GI transit at 9 and 12 h. Prucalopride (4 mg/kg) did not significantly alter GI transit scores, but at a dose of 4 mg/kg beads had moved significantly more distal than the caecum in 12 h compared to controls. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: We report a novel high-resolution, non-invasive, X-ray imaging technique that provides new insights into GI transit rates in live rats. The results demonstrate that loperamide slowed overall transit in aged rats, while prucalopride increased stomach emptying and accelerates colonic transit.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".