MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802810292 · doi:10.1177/0271678x18773871

MicroRNA-based therapeutics in central nervous system injuries

2018· review· en· W2802810292 on OpenAlexaff
Ping Sun, Da Zhi Liu, Glen C. Jickling, Frank R. Sharp, Ke‐Jie Yin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicroRNA in disease regulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsmicroRNACentral nervous systemMedicineNervous systemNeuroscienceComputational biologyBioinformaticsBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Central nervous system (CNS) injuries, such as stroke, traumatic brain injury (TBI) and spinal cord injury (SCI), are important causes of death and long-term disability worldwide. MicroRNA (miRNA), small non-coding RNA molecules that negatively regulate gene expression, can serve as diagnostic biomarkers and are emerging as novel therapeutic targets for CNS injuries. MiRNA-based therapeutics include miRNA mimics and inhibitors (antagomiRs) to respectively decrease and increase the expression of target genes. In this review, we summarize current miRNA-based therapeutic applications in stroke, TBI and SCI. Administration methods, time windows and dosage for effective delivery of miRNA-based drugs into CNS are discussed. The underlying mechanisms of miRNA-based therapeutics are reviewed including oxidative stress, inflammation, apoptosis, blood-brain barrier protection, angiogenesis and neurogenesis. Pharmacological agents that protect against CNS injuries by targeting specific miRNAs are presented along with the challenges and therapeutic potential of miRNA-based therapies.

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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations269
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cerebral Blood Flow & MetabolismSame topicMicroRNA in disease regulationFrench-language works237,207