History of ALS and the competing theories on pathogenesis: IFCN handbook chapter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a rapidly progressive neurodegenerative disorder of the human motor system, first described in the 19th Century. The etiology of ALS appears to be multifactorial, with a complex interaction of genetic, epigenetic, and environmental factors underlying the onset of disease. Importantly, there are no known naturally occurring animal models, and transgenic mouse models fail to faithfully reproduce ALS as it manifests in patients. Debate as to the site of onset of ALS remain, with three competing theories proposed, including (i) the dying-forward hypothesis, whereby motor neuron degeneration is mediated by hyperexcitable corticomotoneurons via an anterograde transsynaptic excitotoxic mechanism, (ii) dying-back hypothesis, proposing the ALS begins in the peripheral nervous system with a toxic factor(s) retrogradely transported into the central nervous system and mediating upper motor neuron dysfunction, and (iii) independent hypothesis, suggesting that upper and lower motor neuron degenerated independently. Transcranial magnetic stimulation studies, along with pathological and genetic findings have supported the dying forward hypothesis theory, although the science is yet to be settled. The review provides a historical overview of ALS, discusses phenotypes and likely pathogenic mechanisms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".