MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3203654974 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-929977/v1

Investigation of Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption in an Animal Model of Mania Induced by d-Amphetamine

2021· preprint· en· W3203654974 on OpenAlexafffund
Luíza Paul Géa, Bianca Wollenhaupt-Aguiar, Devon Watts, William Maich, Flávio Kapczinski, Roohie Sharma, Ram K. Mishra, Adriane Ribeiro Rosa, Benício N. Frey

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersDivision of Graduate EducationCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorPhysicians' Services Incorporated Foundation
KeywordsAmphetamineManiaBlood–brain barrierAnimal modelNeuroscienceChemistryPharmacologyPsychologyMedicineInternal medicineBipolar disorderCentral nervous systemCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Bipolar disorder (BD) is a recurrent chronic psychiatric disorder. Evidence indicates that many individuals with BD exhibit high serum levels of inflammation and oxidative stress markers, which are further associated with mood symptoms and cognitive dysfunction. Due to the crosstalk between the periphery and central nervous system in BD, the disruption of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) has been proposed as a key mechanism of the pathophysiology of the disorder. This study aimed to investigate claudin-5 expression – a major protein of the BBB – in the brain of an animal model of mania induced by d-amphetamine (AMPH) and evaluate the effects of treatment with lithium. Results: AMPH-injected animals exhibited increased overall activity in the open field test. In the serum, TBARS levels were augmented in the lithium-treated groups, regardless of AMPH injection, while TNFα was not detected. In the brain, TBARS and TNFα did not differ between groups but were positively and strongly correlated in the ST of AMPH-injected rats. Contrary to the primary hypothesis, AMPH and lithium injections did not affect brain claudin-5 protein levels.Conclusions: This is one of the first attempts to investigate the effects of AMPH on BBB integrity. Although no evidence of BBB disruption was found in the current study, our results provide evidence and rationale for future research to elucidate the importance of such alteration in BD.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicBipolar Disorder and Treatment→French-language works237,207→