MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2759964530 · doi:10.1002/bies.201700054

ADNP Plays a Key Role in Autophagy: From Autism to Schizophrenia and Alzheimer's Disease

2017· review· en· W2759964530 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shlomo Sragovich, Avia Merenlender‐Wagner, Illana Gozes

Bibliographic record

VenueBioEssays · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTel Aviv UniversityMinistry of Science and Technology, IsraelIsrael Science FoundationCanadian Friends of Tel Aviv University
KeywordsAutophagyNeuroprotectionAutism spectrum disorderNeuroscienceAutismBiologyNapSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)MicrotubuleMedicineCell biologyGeneticsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Activity-dependent neuroprotective protein (ADNP), discovered in our laboratory in 1999, has been characterized as a master gene vital for mammalian brain formation. ADNP de novo mutations in humans result in a syndromic form of autism-like spectrum disorder (ASD), including cognitive and motor deficits, the ADNP syndrome (Helsmoortel-Van Der Aa). One of the most important cellular processes associated with ADNP is the autophagy pathway, recently discovered by us as a key player in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia. In this regard, given the link between the microtubule and autophagy systems, the ADNP microtubule end binding protein motif, namely, the neuroprotective NAP (NAPVSIPQ), was found to enhance autophagy while protecting microtubules and augmenting ADNP's association with both systems. Thus, linking autophagy and ADNP is proposed as a major target for intervention in brain diseases from autism to Alzheimer's disease (AD) and our findings introduce autophagy as a possible novel target for treating schizophrenia.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0030.002

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations59
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioEssaysSame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207