MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289277855 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/xa62p

Nutrition and neutraceutical interventions as therapeutic strategies to aid recovery from mild traumatic brain injuries

2022· preprint· en· W4289277855 on OpenAlexaff
Amy C. Reichelt, Benjamin T. Dunkley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychedelics and Drug Studies
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraumatic brain injuryConcussionMedicineExcitotoxicityNeuroinflammationNutritional SupplementationNeuroprotectionNutraceuticalIntensive care medicinePharmacologyBioinformaticsPoison controlInjury preventionPsychiatryInflammationInternal medicineBiologyPathologyGlutamate receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concussion, sometimes called a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), is an acquired brain injury resulting in alterations to brain function underpinned by a sequence of neuropathological and neurometabolic events that can result in excitotoxicity, oxidative stress, oedema, neuroinflammation and cell death. To date, pharmaceutical therapies have had limited success in treating TBI, presenting considerable interest in nutritional therapies in the form of dietary supplementation to alleviate the deleterious pathological sequelae following neurotrauma. Many nutritional supplements have low toxicity, few drug interactions, and are already approved for human use making them attractive potential therapies following a concussion. In the setting of brain injury models, a considerable body of preclinical evidence has accumulated supporting the use of nutritional supplements including essential fatty acids, vitamins, minerals, amino acids, polyphenols, bioflavonoids and other bioactive compounds to facilitate aspects of functional recovery. Here, we review studies presenting diet supplements as therapeutic strategies as potential treatments for mTBI or to augment neurological resistance against mTBI in experimental models, as well as emerging therapeutic targets including the gut microbiome, and psychedelic and non-psychedelic compounds derived from fungi.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPsychedelics and Drug StudiesFrench-language works237,207