MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2399733878

Vitamin D receptor ligands for osteoporosis.

2006· article· en· W2399733878 on OpenAlexaff
Boris J. Cheskis, Leonard P. Freedman, Sunil Nagpal

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalcitriol receptorAlfacalcidolCalcitriolVitamin D and neurologyPharmacologyChemistryEndocrinologyMedicineSteroid hormoneOsteoporosisInternal medicineReceptor
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1alpha,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D3 (1,25-(OH)2D3), the biologically active metabolite of vitamin D, mediates its actions via the vitamin D receptor (VDR), a member of the superfamily of steroid/thyroid hormone/retinoid receptors. 1,25-(OH)2D3 is required for calcium and phosphorus homeostasis, and for normal skeletal development as well as maintenance of skeletal architecture. Two VDR ligands, calcitriol (1,25-(OH)2D3) and its synthetic analog alfacalcidol (1alpha-hydroxyvitamin D3), have been approved for the treatment of osteoporosis. However, the use of calcitriol and alfacalcidol is limited by their major side effect, hypercalcemia, which is mediated mainly by VDR activity in the small intestine. In order to identify VDR ligands with less hypercalcemia liability, a number of pharmaceutical companies are pursuing efforts to develop synthetic vitamin D analogs. This review discusses the mechanism of action of vitamin D, and summarizes the currently approved anti-osteoporotic VDR agonists and compounds that are under development. The future directions of vitamin D research for the discovery of novel VDR agonists for osteoporosis are also discussed.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0800.036

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 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

Citations22
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVitamin D Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207