MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ketamine Increases the Function of γ-Aminobutyric Acid Type A Receptors in Hippocampal and Cortical Neurons

2016· article· en· W4246224178 on OpenAlexaff
Dian-Shi Wang, Antonello Penna, Beverley A. Orser

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Chilena de Anestesia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReceptor Mechanisms and Signaling
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHippocampal formationAminobutyric acidNeuroscienceReceptorKetamineCortical neuronsPsychologyInternal medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introducción:The "dissociative" general anesthetic ketamine is a well-known NMDA receptor antagonist 1 .However, whether ketamine, at clinically relevant concentrations, increases the activity of inhibitory GABA A receptors in different brain regions remains controversial 2,3,4 .Here, we studied the effects of ketamine on synaptic and extrasynaptic GABA A receptors in hippocampal neurons.Ketamine modulation of extrasynaptic GABA A receptors in cortical neurons was also examined.Objetivo General: To determine whether ketamine potentiates the function of extrasynaptic and synaptic GABA A receptors in the hippocampus and cortex.Material y Métodos: Whole-cell currents were recorded from primary cultures of hippocampal and cortical neurons of mice.Current evoked by exogenous GABA, miniature inhibitory postsynaptic currents, and currents directly activated by ketamine were studied.Data are represented as mean ± S.E.M. together with the 95% confidence interval of the mean (CI).Student's t test (paired or unpaired), one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), two-way ANOVA were used where appropriate.Cumulative distributions of the amplitude and frequency of mIPSCs were compared using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.Pearson correlation coefficient was used to measure the strength of concentration-dependent effects.Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.No statistical power calculation was conducted prior to the study.The sample size was based on our previous experience with this experimental design.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Chilena de AnestesiaSame topicReceptor Mechanisms and SignalingFrench-language works237,207