MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020843568 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100001712

Lactate Stress Testing in 155 Patients with Mitochondriopathy

2002· article· en· W3020843568 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Josef Finsterer, Erika Milvay

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMitochondrial Function and Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOxidative metabolismInternal medicineBlood lactateWorkloadOxidative stressCardiologySurgeryMetabolismHeart rateBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Few data are available about the diagnostic yield of the lactate stress test (LST) in a large group of patients with mitochondriopathy (MCP). METHODS: Serum lactate was determined once before, three times during, and once after a 15-minute, constant 30W workload on a bicycle in 62 controls, aged 17 to 84 years, 155 patients with MCP, aged 17 to 87 years, and 31 patients with neurological disorders other than MCP. RESULTS: Lactate's upper reference limits at rest, 5, 10, 15 minutes after starting, and 15 minutes after finishing the exercise were 2.0, 2.1, 2.1, 2.1 and 1.8 mmol/l respectively. The test was regarded abnormal if more than two of the five lactate values exceeded the cut-off levels. Among the 103 patients with abnormal LST, 64 (62 %) had normal resting lactate. The sensitivity of the test was 67% and the specificity 94%. CONCLUSION: The LST proved to have a high sensitivity and specificity in the detection of patients with MCP, being thus a simple but powerful tool to assess the impaired oxidative metabolism in MCP patients.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations39
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicMitochondrial Function and PathologyFrench-language works237,207