MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914406467 · doi:10.1111/jnc.14674

Inflammatory mechanisms in neurodegeneration

2019· review· en· W2914406467 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael R. Nichols, Marie‐Kim St‐Pierre, Ann‐Christin Wendeln, Nyasha J. Makoni, Lisa K. Gouwens, Evan Garrad, Mona Sohrabi, Jonas J. Neher, Marie‐Ève Tremblay, Colin K. Combs

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurochemistry · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNational Institute on AgingFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute of General Medical SciencesCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsNeurodegenerationNeuroscienceMedicineBiologyPathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review discusses the profound connection between microglia, neuroinflammation, and Alzheimer's disease (AD). Theories have been postulated, tested, and modified over several decades. The findings have further bolstered the belief that microglia-mediated inflammation is both a product and contributor to AD pathology and progression. Distinct microglia phenotypes and their function, microglial recognition and response to protein aggregates in AD, and the overall role of microglia in AD are areas that have received considerable research attention and yielded significant results. The following article provides a historical perspective of microglia, a detailed discussion of multiple microglia phenotypes including dark microglia, and a review of a number of areas where microglia intersect with AD and other pathological neurological processes. The overall breadth of important discoveries achieved in these areas significantly strengthens the hypothesis that neuroinflammation plays a key role in AD. Future determination of the exact mechanisms by which microglia respond to, and attempt to mitigate, protein aggregation in AD may lead to new therapeutic strategies.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

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 communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations122
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurochemistrySame topicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsFrench-language works237,207