MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394414637 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20039651

Comparative stomach tissue distribution profiles of four major bio-active components of Radix Astragali in normal and gastric ulcer mice

2022· dataset· en· W4394414637 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaohua Liu, Zhiyuan Xue, Bo Wang, Ying Wang, Mengting Zhang, Shilan Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraditional Chinese Medicine Analysis
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadix (gastropod)StomachDistribution (mathematics)Traditional medicineInternal medicineBiologyMedicineBotanyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Numerous studies have demonstrated that Radix Astragali can inhibit gastric ulcers in mice. Anhydrous ethanol (0.01 mL/g) administered to mice by intragastric infusion can induce gastric ulcer injury. This study was performed to compare the stomach tissue distribution profiles of four major bioactive constituents of Radix Astragali(calycosin-7-O-β-d-glucoside, calycosin, ononin and formononetin) after oral administration of extract of Radix Astragali (ERA)in normal and gastric ulcer mice. The abundance of Radix Astragali constituents was determined using an ultra-pressure liquid chromatograph with a photodiode array detector (UPLC-PDA), after which histograms were drawn. In comparison with normal mice, the contents of calycosin- 7-O-β-d-glucoside, calycosin, ononin and formononetin in the stomach tissue samples of gastric ulcer mice showed significant differences at the selected time points (P < 0.05).The abundance of each of the four tested constituents in the normal groups was higher than that of the gastric ulcer groups. This study provides an empirical foundation for future studies focused on developing clinical applications of Radix Astragali.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
GenreDataset

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 venueFigshareSame topicTraditional Chinese Medicine AnalysisFrench-language works237,207