MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384819592 · doi:10.1186/s40035-023-00368-8

Animal models of Parkinson’s disease: bridging the gap between disease hallmarks and research questions

2023· review· en· W4384819592 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Neurodegeneration · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDiseaseParkinson's diseaseNeuroscienceMedicineDiscernmentAnimal modelClinical phenotypeNeurologyPopulationPsychologyPathologyBiologyPhenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson's disease (PD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by motor and non-motor symptoms. More than 200 years after its first clinical description, PD remains a serious affliction that affects a growing proportion of the population. Prevailing treatments only alleviate symptoms; there is still neither a cure that targets the neurodegenerative processes nor therapies that modify the course of the disease. Over the past decades, several animal models have been developed to study PD. Although no model precisely recapitulates the pathology, they still provide valuable information that contributes to our understanding of the disease and the limitations of our treatment options. This review comprehensively summarizes the different animal models available for Parkinson's research, with a focus on those induced by drugs, neurotoxins, pesticides, genetic alterations, α-synuclein inoculation, and viral vector injections. We highlight their characteristics and ability to reproduce PD-like phenotypes. It is essential to realize that the strengths and weaknesses of each model and the induction technique at our disposal are determined by the research question being asked. Our review, therefore, seeks to better aid researchers by ensuring a concrete discernment of classical and novel animal models in PD research.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.175 · 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