MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230514803 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp.7947

A Novel Mechanism of Inflammation in the Esophagus

2017· article· en· W4230514803 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daniel J. Mulder

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEosinophilic Esophagitis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEsophagusInflammationBystander effectMechanism (biology)Eosinophilic esophagitisGene silencingEsophagitisMedicineImmunologyBiologyGeneDiseasePathologyInternal medicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The esophagus, long considered an inactive bystander in the digestive tract, is now known to be involved in monitoring food intake by various mechanisms. This active observation can lead to various disease states, one of which is esophagitis, that is, inflammation of the esophagus. Esophagitis can have various causes. One culprit appears to be the presence and activation of white blood cells called eosinophils in the esophagus. This study proposed that eosinophils release a chemical known as major basic protein (MBP) that causes esophageal inflammation. Experiments involving a living cell model of the lining of the esophagus and biopsies taken from pediatric patients confirmed this mechanism. Specifically, gene induction and gene silencing experiments confirmed that a cellular receptor in the esophagus binds to the MBP that is released from eosinophils. Further restitution and proliferation experiments suggest that certain genes, when induced by MBP stimulate growth and migration of the cells that line the esophagus.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicEosinophilic EsophagitisFrench-language works237,207