MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963578219 · doi:10.3233/jad-190102

Activity Rhythms Are Largely Intact in APP <sup>NL-G-F</sup> Alzheimer’s Disease Mice

2019· article· en· W2963578219 on OpenAlexaff
Scott H. Deibel, Bryant Young, Majid H. Mohajerani, Robert J. McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Alzheimer s Disease · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRhythmNeuroscienceDiseaseCircadian rhythmMedicinePsychologyBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circadian rhythm dysfunction is present in Alzheimer's disease. Animal models of Alzheimer's disease have been employed to investigate whether this dysfunction is a risk factor or symptom of the disease. The circadian phenotype in mouse models of Alzheimer's disease is very disparate in terms of the degree and timing of the dysfunction. This is likely a result of some models elevating amyloid-β protein precursor instead of just the amyloid-β fragment present in human Alzheimer's disease. We characterized activity rhythms in a novel knock-in mouse model (APPNL-G-F) of Alzheimer's disease that elevates amyloid-β without overexpressing amyloid-β protein precursor. Despite increased rhythm amplitude, total activity, and a shortening of free-running period at 15 months of age, all other aspects of the activity rhythm were similar to controls from three to fifteen months of age. At two months of age, these mice were also able to entrain to a light-dark cycle with a period right on the edge of entrainment, which further suggests a healthy functioning circadian system. These data open the possibility that circadian rhythm disruptions in transgenic models of Alzheimer's disease could be a result of these models having an artificial phenotype caused by overexpression of amyloid-β protein precursor.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Alzheimer s DiseaseSame topicCholinesterase and Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207