MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621095463 · doi:10.1002/jnr.24090

Modulating inflammation and neuroprotection in multiple sclerosis

2017· review· en· W2621095463 on OpenAlexafffund
Heather Yong, Gabrielle Chartier, Jacqueline A. Quandt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience Research · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMultiple Sclerosis Society of Canada
KeywordsNeuroprotectionMultiple sclerosisInflammationNeuroscienceMedicineImmunologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a neurological disorder of the central nervous system with a presentation and disease course that is largely unpredictable. MS can cause loss of balance, impaired vision or speech, weakness and paralysis, fatigue, depression, and cognitive impairment. Immunomodulation is a major target given the appearance of focal demyelinating lesions in myelin-rich white matter, yet progression and an increasing appreciation for gray matter involvement, even during the earliest phases of the disease, highlights the need to afford neuroprotection and limit neurodegenerative processes that correlate with disability. This review summarizes key aspects of MS pathophysiology and histopathology with a focus on neuroimmune interactions in MS, which may facilitate neurodegeneration through both direct and indirect mechanisms. There is a focus on processes thought to influence disease progression and the role of oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction in MS. The goals and efficacy of current disease-modifying therapies and those in the pipeline are discussed, highlighting recent advances in our understanding of pathways mediating disease progression to identify and translate both immunomodulatory and neuroprotective therapeutics from the bench to the clinic.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.705
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations38
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience ResearchSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207