MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956321816 · doi:10.7555/jbr.32.20170137

Emerging pathways of communication between the heart and non-cardiac organs

2018· article· en· W2956321816 on OpenAlexafffund
Eugenio Hardy-Rando, Carlos Fernández-Patrón

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Fibrosis and Remodeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsMediatorMatrix metalloproteinasePhospholipase A2ChemokineHomeostasismicroRNAMedicineInternal medicineBiologyInflammationBioinformaticsEnzymeBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The breakthrough discovery of cardiac natriuretic peptides provided the first direct demonstration of the connection between the heart and the kidneys for the maintenance of sodium and volume homeostasis in health and disease. Yet, little is still known about how the heart and other organs cross-talk. Here, we review three physiological mechanisms of communication linking the heart to other organs through: i) cardiac natriuretic peptides, ii) the microRNA-208a/mediator complex subunit-13 axis and iii) the matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2)/C-C motif chemokine ligand-7/cardiac secreted phospholipase A2 (sPLA2) axis - a pathway which likely applies to the many cytokines, which are cleaved and regulated by MMP-2. We also suggest experimental strategies to answer still open questions on the latter pathway. In short, we review evidence showing how the cardiac secretome influences the metabolic and inflammatory status of non-cardiac organs as well as the heart.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · 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
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical ResearchSame topicCardiac Fibrosis and RemodelingFrench-language works237,207