MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4254349320 · doi:10.24124/2010/bpgub665

The use of platelet monoamine oxidase-B as a biomarker for mercury neurotoxic effects among Inuit in Arctic Canada.

2010· dissertation· en· W4254349320 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alyssa Shaw

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoLibrary and Archives Canada
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsMonoamine oxidasePlateletBiomarkerMercury (programming language)PopulationMonoamine neurotransmitterThe arcticChemistryBiologyPhysiologyInternal medicineEnvironmental chemistryBiochemistryMedicineEnzymeSerotoninEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mercury (Hg) is a widespread neurotoxin, therefore it is important to identify a biomarker of effect in populations that could be at risk of Hg exposure. Platelet monoamine oxidase (MAO) could be a biomarker since animal studies indicate that brain and platelet MAO activity decreases as blood Hg increases. This study examined the relationship between blood Hg and platelet MAO activities among Inuit in the Canadian Arctic. This study found an increase in platelet MAO activities as blood Hg levels increased, which could be due to the high selenium (Se) in the population. This study then examined the relationship between Hg and MAO activities in an established cell line (SH-SY5Y) and found that Hg treated cells had an increase in MAO activities, but no changes occurred in MAO-A mRNA levels. Discrepancies between animal studies and these in vitro results could be due to differences between cell lines and whole organisms. --P.ii.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMercury impact and mitigation studies→French-language works237,207→