MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W32501286 · doi:10.1242/jcs.239384

Planning Family Involvement in Early Childhood Programs.

2000· article· en· W32501286 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Judith Kieff, Karyn Wellhousen

Bibliographic record

VenueYoung children · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParental Involvement in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychologyEarly childhood educationDevelopmental psychologyEarly childhoodPreschool educationDevelopmentally Appropriate PracticeChild developmentPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanism and role of transient F-actin recruitment, or F-actin 'flashes', on phagosomes remains enigmatic. Here we provide a comprehensive characterization of F-actin flashing dynamics on phagosomes, including receptor and signaling involvement. F-actin flashes predominate during the integrin-driven complement receptor (CR)-mediated phagocytosis. F-actin flashes begin shortly after internalization and persist on phagosomes for approximately 3 minutes before disassembling and reassembling several times within the first hour. Strikingly, the appearance of F-actin flashes on phagosomes coincides with morphological deformation, lysis and occasional fission of internalized red blood cells. The cadence of flashes depends on particle stiffness, and the F-actin networks on phagosomes are enriched in mechanosensitive components including focal adhesion proteins, RhoA and actomyosin. Inhibiting Arp2/3 and myosin IIA activity significantly reduces the frequency at which phagosome cargo becomes deformed during transient F-actin accumulation. At later time points, post-F-actin flashing, enhanced degradation of phagosome contents is observed, compared with non-flashing phagosomes. Taken together, these data suggest that actomyosin-driven phagosome contractions serve to disrupt malleable particles physically, a process akin to mastication, to enhance later enzymatic digestion.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations15
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYoung childrenSame topicParental Involvement in EducationFrench-language works237,207