Mechanisms for the transition from physiological to pathological cardiac hypertrophy
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The heart is capable of responding to stressful situations by increasing muscle mass, which is broadly defined as cardiac hypertrophy. This phenomenon minimizes ventricular wall stress for the heart undergoing a greater than normal workload. At initial stages, cardiac hypertrophy is associated with normal or enhanced cardiac function and is considered to be adaptive or physiological; however, at later stages, if the stimulus is not removed, it is associated with contractile dysfunction and is termed as pathological cardiac hypertrophy. It is during physiological cardiac hypertrophy where the function of subcellular organelles, including the sarcolemma, sarcoplasmic reticulum, mitochondria, and myofibrils, may be upregulated, while pathological cardiac hypertrophy is associated with downregulation of these subcellular activities. The transition of physiological cardiac hypertrophy to pathological cardiac hypertrophy may be due to the reduction in blood supply to hypertrophied myocardium as a consequence of reduced capillary density. Oxidative stress, inflammatory processes, Ca 2+ -handling abnormalities, and apoptosis in cardiomyocytes are suggested to play a critical role in the depression of contractile function during the development of pathological hypertrophy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it