MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121444104 · doi:10.3390/antiox10020153

How N-Acetylcysteine Supplementation Affects Redox Regulation, Especially at Mitohormesis and Sarcohormesis Level: Current Perspective

2021· review· en· W3121444104 on OpenAlexaff
Aslı Devrim-Lanpir, Lee Hill, Beat Knechtle

Bibliographic record

VenueAntioxidants · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicExercise and Physiological Responses
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOxidative stressAcetylcysteineAthletesGlutathioneNarrative reviewAntioxidantMedicineReactive oxygen speciesPopulationExercise physiologyPharmacologyPhysiologyInternal medicinePhysical therapyChemistryIntensive care medicineBiochemistryEnvironmental healthEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exercise frequently alters the metabolic processes of oxidative metabolism in athletes, including exposure to extreme reactive oxygen species impairing exercise performance. Therefore, both researchers and athletes have been consistently investigating the possible strategies to improve metabolic adaptations to exercise-induced oxidative stress. N-acetylcysteine (NAC) has been applied as a therapeutic agent in treating many diseases in humans due to its precursory role in the production of hepatic glutathione, a natural antioxidant. Several studies have investigated NAC's possible therapeutic role in oxidative metabolism and adaptive response to exercise in the athletic population. However, still conflicting questions regarding NAC supplementation need to be clarified. This narrative review aims to re-evaluate the metabolic effects of NAC on exercise-induced oxidative stress and adaptive response developed by athletes against the exercise, especially mitohormetic and sarcohormetic response.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntioxidantsSame topicExercise and Physiological ResponsesFrench-language works237,207