MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

S-40-1: INFLAMMATION AND IMMUNITY IN HYPERTENSION

2023· article· en· W4315705396 on OpenAlexaff
Ernesto L. Schiffrin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicSodium Intake and Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineImmune systemInflammationImmunologyAcquired immune systemInnate immune systemImmunityPathophysiology of hypertensionKidneyBlood pressureInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past almost 30 years the roles of inflammation and later of specific immune cells in the mechanisms of hypertension have increasingly been demonstrated. Initially it was shown that immune cells infiltrated perivascular tissue in the heart and kidney. Later, the demonstration that macrophages and shortly after T lymphocytes were critical for angiotensin II and DOCA-salt-induced hypertension consolidated the idea that immune mechanisms played a role in cardiovascular and renal injury in hypertension. As well, the anti-inflammatory role of T regulatory lymphocytes, the participation of dendritic cells, of gamma/delta T lymphocytes, of neutrophils through the formation of neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs), has become evident. The role of antigen presentation and intracellular mechanisms leading to activation of innate and adaptive immunity in hypertension have offered additional opportunities for eventually targeting the immune system to control inflammation-mediated damage in hypertension. Interferon-gamma and interleukin-17 appear to be important pro-inflammatory cytokines, whereas interleukin-10 plays an anti-inflammatory role in hypertension. Recent application of single cell RNA sequencing has opened novel vistas of the landscape of immune cells participating in cardiovascular and renal injury in hypertension, which can lead to new therapeutic options to control blood pressure and target organ damage in hypertensive patients.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HypertensionSame topicSodium Intake and HealthFrench-language works237,207