MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899274517 · doi:10.1152/ajprenal.00163.2018

The determinants, biomarkers, and consequences of microvascular injury in kidney transplant recipients

2018· review· en· W2899274517 on OpenAlexafffund
Alice Doreille, Mélanie Dieudé, Héloïse Cardinal

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Renal Physiology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersKidney Foundation of Canada
KeywordsPeritubular capillariesPathologyFibrosisIschemiaMedicineHuman leukocyte antigenKidneyImmunologyHypoxia (environmental)PericyteBiologyEndothelial stem cellAntigenInternal medicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Independent of the initial cause of kidney disease, microvascular injury to the peritubular capillary network appears to play a central role in the development of interstitial fibrosis in both native and transplanted kidney disease. This association is explained by mechanisms such as the upregulation of profibrotic genes and epigenetic changes induced by hypoxia, capillary leakage, endothelial and pericyte transition to interstitial fibroblasts, as well as modifications in the secretome of endothelial cells. Alloimmune injury due to antibody-mediated rejection and ischemia-reperfusion injury are the two main etiologies of microvascular damage in kidney transplant recipients. The presence of circulating donor-specific anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies, histological findings, such as diffuse C4d staining in peritubular capillaries, and the extent and severity of peritubular capillaritis, are commonly used clinically to provide both diagnostic and prognostic information. Complement-dependent assays, circulating non-HLA antibodies, or evaluation of the microvasculature with novel imaging techniques are the subject of ongoing studies.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Renal PhysiologySame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207