MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200116108 · doi:10.3389/fnsyn.2021.773590

Microglia Heterogeneity in Alzheimer’s Disease: Insights From Single-Cell Technologies

2021· review· en· W4200116108 on OpenAlexaff
Hansen Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Synaptic Neuroscience · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrogliaNeuroscienceBiologyImmune systemNeurodegenerationCentral nervous systemNeuroinflammationCellMass cytometryDiseaseMedicineImmunologyInflammationPathologyGenePhenotypeGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microglia are resident immune cells in the central nervous system and play critical roles in brain immunity, development, and homeostasis. The pathology of Alzheimer's disease (AD) triggers activation of microglia. Microglia express many AD risk genes, suggesting that their response to AD pathology can affect disease progression. Microglia have long been considered a homogenous cell population. The diversity of microglia has gained great interest in recent years due to the emergence of novel single-cell technologies, such as single-cell/nucleus RNA sequencing and single-cell mass cytometry by time-of-flight. This review summarizes the current knowledge about the diversity/heterogeneity of microglia and distinct microglia states in the brain of both AD mouse models and patients, as revealed by single-cell technologies. It also discusses the future developments for application of single-cell technologies and the integration of these technologies with functional studies to further dissect microglia biology in AD. Defining the functional correlates of distinct microglia states will shed new light on the pathological roles of microglia and might uncover new relevant therapeutic targets for AD.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.298
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations61
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Synaptic NeuroscienceSame topicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsFrench-language works237,207