MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127841503 · doi:10.1139/facets-2020-0029

Relaxin peptides reduce cellular damage in cultured brain slices exposed to transient oxygen–glucose deprivation: an effect mediated by nitric oxide

2021· article· en· W3127841503 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Nicholas P. DeAdder, Hannah Jeanine Gillam, Brian C. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy-related medical research
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
FundersNova Scotia Health Research FoundationAcadia University
KeywordsRelaxinNitric oxideChemistryInternal medicineEndocrinologyReceptorProgrammed cell deathApoptosisBiologyBiochemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of treatment with human relaxins on cell death was studied in oxygen- and glucose-deprived brain slices. In addition, involvement of nitric oxide and the relaxin receptor, RXFP3, was studied. Brain slices ( n = 12–18/group) were cultured under standard conditions for two weeks and then exposed to: ( i) an oxygenated balanced salt solution, ( ii) a deoxygenated, glucose-free balanced salt solution (OGD media), or ( iii) OGD media containing 10 −7 mol/L H2 relaxin, 10 −7 mol/L H2 relaxin with 50 μmol/L L-NIL, 10 −7 mol/L H3 relaxin, or 10 −7 mol/L H3 relaxin with 50 μmol/L L-NIL. Cell death was assessed using propidium iodide fluorescence. In a separate experiment, 10 −5 mol/L R3 B1-22R (an antagonist of RXFP3) was added to both H2 and H3 relaxin treatments. H2 and H3 relaxin treatment reduced cell damage or death in OGD slices and L-NIL partially attenuated the effect of H3 relaxin. Antagonism of RXFP3 blocked the effect of H3 but not H2 relaxin. These data increase our understanding of the role of relaxin ligands and their receptors in protecting tissues throughout the body from ischemia and reperfusion injury.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicPregnancy-related medical researchFrench-language works237,207