MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2623183531 · doi:10.1177/1074248416683047

The Effect of Clopidogrel on the Response to Ischemia Reperfusion

2016· article· en· W2623183531 on OpenAlexaff
Wilson Kwong, John D. Parker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology and Therapeutics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Ischemia and Reperfusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClopidogrelIschemiaAdverse effectPlateletPlaceboInternal medicineAnesthesiaCardiologyEndothelial dysfunctionAspirinPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reperfusion in the setting of acute ischemia is essential in limiting tissue necrosis. However, reperfusion itself is associated with significant adverse effects. There is animal evidence that platelets play a role in the adverse effects of ischemia and reperfusion (IR) injury. We examined whether clopidogrel would have favorable effects on endothelial dysfunction induced by an episode of IR. Using a parallel design, we administered clopidogrel 600 mg or matching placebo to normal volunteers (n = 20) 24 hours before an episode of IR. Flow-mediated dilatation (FMD, radial artery) was assessed before and after 20 minutes of upper arm ischemia. Following IR, there was a highly significant decrease in FMD in the placebo group (7.6% ± 1.3% vs 3.4% ± 0.1%; P < .001). In the clopidogrel group, there was no change in FMD post-IR (8.3% ± 0.8% vs 7.1% ± 1.2%; P = not significant). Following IR, FMD in the placebo group was significantly smaller than that observed in the clopidogrel group ( P < .01). Ischemia and reperfusion caused no change in plasma levels of biomarkers of inflammation (intercellular adhesion molecule 1, chemokine ligand 5, and interleukin 6) in either group. Therefore, a single dose of clopidogrel given 24 hours prior to an episode of IR had protective effects, limiting the adverse effects of ischemia on endothelial function.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology and TherapeuticsSame topicCardiac Ischemia and ReperfusionFrench-language works237,207