MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W31492847 · doi:10.1038/s41389-019-0151-1

Use of McKenzie cervical protocol in the treatment of radicular neck pain in a machine operator

2003· article· en· W31492847 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sundeep Rathore

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChiropracticNeck painMedicineRadicular painPhysical therapyManual therapyProtocol (science)Physical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryAlternative medicinePathologyLumbar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MicroRNA (miRNA) and fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 (FGFR1) dysregulation are considered to play an important role in tumor proliferation, invasion, and metastasis. However, the regulatory mechanism between miRNAs and FGFR1 in lung cancer remains unclear and extremely critical. miR-214-3p was sharply decreased and showed a significantly negative correlation with FGFR1 in lung cancer patients (n = 30). Luciferase reporter assay confirmed that miR-214-3p could downregulate FGFR1 by directly targeting 3'-untranslated region (UTR). miR-214-3p inhibited the processes of epithelial-mesenchymal transition and Wnt/MAPK/AKT (Wnt/mitogen-activated protein kinase/AKT) signaling pathway by targeting FGFR1. Moreover, miR-214-3p not only established a negative feedback regulation loop with FGFR1 through ERK (extracellular signal-regulated kinase) but also developed a synergism with FGFR1 inhibitor AZD4547. In conclusion, our study demonstrated the regulatory mechanism between miR-214-3p and FGFR1 in lung cancer. miR-214-3p acts as a vital target in FGFR1-amplified lung cancer by forming a miR-214-3p-FGFR1-Wnt/MAPK/AKT signaling pathway network. Co-targeting miR-214-3p and FGFR1 could provide greater benefits to patients with FGFR1-amplified lung cancer.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Chiropractic AssociationSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207