MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589716687 · doi:10.1093/neuros/nyw078

Intervertebral Disk Degeneration and Repair

2017· review· en· W2589716687 on OpenAlexaff
James Dowdell, Mark Erwin, Theodoe Choma, Alexander R. Vaccaro, James C. Iatridis, Samuel K. Cho

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgery · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases
KeywordsDegeneration (medical)MedicineModalitiesBioinformaticsLow back painDegenerative disc diseaseClinical trialDiseaseDegenerative DisorderIntervertebral discPathologyNeuroscienceSurgeryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intervertebral disk (IVD) degeneration is a natural progression of the aging process. Degenerative disk disease (DDD) is a pathologic condition associated with IVD that has been associated with chronic back pain. There are a variety of different mechanisms of DDD (genetic, mechanical, exposure). Each of these pathways leads to a final common result of unbalancing the anabolic and catabolic environment of the extracellular matrix in favor of catabolism. Attempts have been made to gain an understanding of the process of IVD degeneration with in Vitro studies. These models help our understanding of the disease process, but are limited as they do not come close to replicating the complexities that exist with an in Vivo model. Animal models have been developed to help us gain further understanding of the degenerative cascade of IVD degeneration In Vivo and test experimental treatment modalities to either prevent or reverse the process of DDD. Many modalities for treatment of DDD have been developed including therapeutic protein injections, stem cell injections, gene therapy, and tissue engineering. These interventions have had promising outcomes in animal models. Several of these modalities have been attempted in human trials, with early outcomes having promising results. Further, increasing our understanding of the degenerative process is essential to the development of new therapeutic interventions and the optimization of existing treatment protocols. Despite limited data, biological therapies are a promising treatment modality for DDD that could impact our future management of low back pain.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.219
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations483
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurosurgerySame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207