MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404961851 · doi:10.61373/bm024k.0121

Etienne Sibille: Investigating the cellular and molecular bases of depression and aging for innovative therapeutics

2024· article· en· W4404961851 on OpenAlexaffabout
Etienne Sibille

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain medicine : · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPassionBrain researchAddictionPsychologyMental healthPsychoanalysisNeurosciencePsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Etienne Sibille, a pioneering figure in neuropsychiatric research, has yet to follow conventional paths. From his early days as a photojournalist editor in New York to becoming one of neuroscience's most innovative voices, his journey reflects the same creative thinking that drives his groundbreaking research at the University of Toronto. As a Professor of Psychiatry, Pharmacology & Toxicology, he brings a fresh perspective to understanding how our brains age and why we get depressed. At the Center for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), where he directs the Neurobiology of Depression and Aging research program, his team is turning fascinating discoveries about brain chemistry into potential new treatments. Building on his influential work at Columbia University and the University of Pittsburgh, Sibille has challenged traditional views of brain disorders, particularly through his insights into the GABAergic system and aging. While serving as CAMH's Campbell Chair (2014–2024) and Deputy Director of the Campbell Institute (2017–2020), he has pushed the boundaries between basic research and real-world treatments, recently diving into biopharma development to help bridge this gap. In this Genomic Press Interview, he shares the winding road that led him from behind a camera lens to the forefront of psychiatric research, offering a candid look at what drives his passion for unraveling the brain's mysteries.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain medicine :Same topicHealth, Environment, Cognitive AgingFrench-language works237,207