MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887916107 · doi:10.1155/2018/2532314

Innate and Adaptive Cell Populations Driving Inflammation in Dry Eye Disease

2018· review· en· W2887916107 on OpenAlexaff
José L. Reyes, Danielle T. Vannan, Bertus Eksteen, Imelda Juárez‐Avelar, Tonathiu Rodríguez, Marisol I. González, Alicia Vázquez-Mendoza

Bibliographic record

VenueMediators of Inflammation · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseImmunologyPathogenesisInflammationMedicineRheumatoid arthritisAcquired immune systemEtiologyImmune systemAutoimmune diseaseImmunityInnate immune systemPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dry eye disease (DED) is the most common ocular disease and affects millions of individuals worldwide. DED encompasses a heterogeneous group of diseases that can be generally divided into two forms including aqueous-deficient and evaporative DED. Evidence suggests that these conditions arise from either failure of lacrimal gland secretion or low tear film quality. In its secondary form, DED is often associated with autoimmune diseases such as Sjögren's syndrome and rheumatoid arthritis. Current treatment strategies for DED are limited to anti-inflammatory medications that target the immune system as the source of deleterious inflammation and tissue injury. However, there is a lack of understanding of the underlying pathogenesis of DED, and subsequently, there are very few effective treatment strategies. The gap in our knowledge of the etiology of primary DED is in part because the majority of research in DED focused on secondary autoimmune causes. This review focuses on what is currently understood about the contribution of innate and adaptive immune cell populations in the pathogenesis of DED and highlights the need to continue investigating the central role of immunity driving DED.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations53
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMediators of InflammationSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207