MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2576786562 · doi:10.1152/ajpgi.00365.2016

Plasticity of neuroeffector transmission during bowel inflammation<sup>1</sup>

2017· review· en· W2576786562 on OpenAlexafffund
Alan Lomax, Sabindra Pradhananga, Paul Bertrand

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersCrohn's and Colitis Foundation of Canada
KeywordsInflammationEffectorMotilityCell biologyBiologyNeuroscienceBlood flowInflammatory bowel diseaseSecretionFunction (biology)ImmunologyDiseasePathologyMedicineInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Altered gastrointestinal (GI) function contributes to the debilitating symptoms of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Nerve circuits contained within the gut wall and outside of the gut play important roles in modulating motility, mucosal fluid transport, and blood flow. The structure and function of these neuronal populations change during IBD. Superimposed on this plasticity is a diminished responsiveness of effector cells - smooth muscle cells, enterocytes, and vascular endothelial cells - to neurotransmitters. The net result is a breakdown in the precisely orchestrated coordination of motility, fluid secretion, and GI blood flow required for health. In this review, we consider how inflammation-induced changes to the effector innervation of these tissues, and changes to the tissues themselves, contribute to defective GI function in models of IBD. We also explore the evidence that reversing neuronal plasticity is sufficient to normalize function during IBD.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.289
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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver PhysiologySame topicGastrointestinal motility and disordersFrench-language works237,207