MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735627816 · doi:10.1139/cjpp-2017-0126

New insights into the non-hemostatic role of von Willebrand factor in endothelial protection

2017· review· en· W2735627816 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Silvia Agostini, Vincenzo Lionetti

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVon Willebrand factorHemostasisMedicineVon Willebrand diseaseEndotheliumPlateletImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During exposure to ischemia–reperfusion (I/R) insult, angiotensin II (AngII)-induced endothelin-1 (ET-1) upregulation in endothelial cells progressively impairs nitric oxide (NO) bioavailability while increasing levels of superoxide anion (O 2 − ) and leading to the onset of endothelial dysfunction. Moreover, the overexpression of ET-1 increases the endothelial and circulating levels of von Willebrand factor (vWF), a glycoprotein with a crucial role in arterial thrombus formation. Nowadays, the non-hemostatic role of endothelial vWF is emerging, although we do not yet know whether its increased expression is cause or consequence of endothelial dysfunction. Notably, the vWF blockade or depletion leads to endothelial protection in cultured cells, animal models of vascular injury, and patients as well. Despite the recent efforts to develop an effective pharmacological strategy, the onset of endothelial dysfunction is still difficult to prevent and remains closely related to adverse clinical outcome. Unraveling the non-hemostatic role of endothelial vWF in the onset of endothelial dysfunction could provide new avenues for protection against vascular injury mediated by AngII.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicPlatelet Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207