MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902686549 · doi:10.1139/cjpp-2018-0363

Alarmins at the maternal–fetal interface: involvement of inflammation in placental dysfunction and pregnancy complications

2018· review· en· W2902686549 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marie‐Eve Brien, Bernadette Baker, Cyntia Duval, Virginie Gaudreault, Rebecca L. Jones, Sylvie Girard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsInflammationPregnancyMedicineFetusPlacentaObstetricsImmunologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inflammation is known to be associated with placental dysfunction and pregnancy complications. Infections are well known to be a cause of inflammation but they are frequently undetectable in pregnancy complications. More recently, the focus has been extended to inflammation of noninfectious origin, namely caused by endogenous mediators known as "damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs)" or alarmins. In this manuscript, we review the mechanism by which inflammation, sterile or infectious, can alter the placenta and its function. We discuss some classical DAMPs, such as uric acid, high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1), cell-free fetal deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) (cffDNA), S100 proteins, heat shock protein 70 (HSP70), and adenosine triphosphate (ATP) and their impact on the placenta. We focus on the main placental cells (i.e., trophoblast and Hofbauer cells) and describe the placental response to, and release of, DAMPs. We also covered the current state of knowledge about the role of DAMPs in pregnancy complications including preeclampsia, fetal growth restriction, preterm birth, and stillbirth and possible therapeutic strategies to preserve placental function.

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 score0.002
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
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations69
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207