MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944399404 · doi:10.1111/acel.12956

Are skin senescence and immunosenescence linked within individuals?

2019· article· en· W2944399404 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAging Cell · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences North
FundersCentre for Medical Systems BiologyNovo NordiskNovo Nordisk FondenDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEuropean CommissionUnilever
KeywordsImmunosenescenceBiologySenescenceComputational biologyGeneticsImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With advancing age, many organs exhibit functional deterioration. The age‐associated accumulation of senescent cells is believed to represent one factor contributing to this phenomenon. While senescent cells are found in several different organ systems, it is not known whether they arise independently in each organ system or whether their prevalence within an individual reflects that individual's intrinsic aging process. To address this question, we studied senescence in two different organ systems in humans, namely skin and T cells in 80 middle‐aged and older individuals from the Leiden Longevity Study. Epidermal p16INK4a positivity was associated with neither CD4 + nor CD8 + T‐cell immunosenescence phenotype composites (i.e., end‐stage differentiated/senescent T cells, including CD45RA + CCR7 ‐ CD28 ‐ CD27 ‐ CD57 + KLRG1 + T cells). Dermal p16INK4a positivity was significantly associated with the CD4 + , but not with the CD8 + immunosenescence composite. We therefore conclude that there is limited evidence for a link between skin senescence and immunosenescence within individuals.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · 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