MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744432761 · doi:10.1002/mus.25760

Ventilator‐induced diaphragmatic dysfunction in <i>MDX</i> mice

2017· article· en· W2744432761 on OpenAlexafffund
Feng‐Xia Liang, Tong Li, Ilan Azuelos, Christian Giordano, Han Liang, Sabah N. A. Hussain, Stéfan Matecki, Basil J. Petrof

Bibliographic record

VenueMuscle & Nerve · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDuchenne muscular dystrophyDiaphragmatic breathingEndocrinologyDiaphragm (acoustics)MyostatinInternal medicineOxidative stressMedicinemdx mouseSkeletal muscleDystrophinPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) frequently undergo mechanical ventilation (MV) for treatment of hypoventilation, but the susceptibility of the dystrophic diaphragm to ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction (VIDD) has not been examined. METHODS: Dystrophic mice (mdx-genetic homolog of DMD) were assigned to non-ventilated control (CTL) and MV (for 6 hours) groups. Biochemical markers of oxidative/cellular stress, metabolism, and proteolysis were compared along with ex-vivo diaphragmatic force production. RESULTS: MV significantly depressed maximal diaphragmatic force production compared with baseline values. In addition, MV triggered oxidative stress responses, STAT3 phosphorylation, and an upregulation of cellular pathways associated with muscle proteolysis and/or wasting (autophagy, E3 ubiquitin ligases, and myostatin). DISCUSSION: Short-term MV induces rapid diaphragmatic force loss and biochemical changes consistent with VIDD in mdx mice. This may have implications for the optimal use of intermittent MV in DMD patients. Muscle Nerve 57: 442-448, 2018.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMuscle & NerveSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207