MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Astrocyte Polarization and Wound Healing in Culture: Studying Cell Adhesion Molecules

2011· article· en· W46255350 on OpenAlexafffund
Hong Peng, S. Carbonetto

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicS100 Proteins and Annexins
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteCancer Research Institute
KeywordsAstrocyteWound healingCell biologyCell adhesion moleculeNeuroscienceCell adhesionBiologyAdhesionCellChemistryCentral nervous systemImmunologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Astrocytes are highly polarized cells. This is manifest not only during development and in the adult brain, but also following injury. In response to a wound, astrocytes extend processes that participate in formation of a glial scar, which walls off lesions in the brain or spinal cord. Similarly, astrocytes in culture polarize dramatically and extend processes towards a scrape wound. This simple assay has allowed much progress in understanding the cellular events and molecular pathways in astrocyte polarization (1). Cell adhesion is essential for the early response to the wound, both with respect to process extension and cell polarization. This is evident in the involvement of members of the integrin family of cell adhesion molecules at the leading edge of the wounded astrocyte. Understanding the cellular and molecular bases of these events is likely relevant to astrocyte function during development (radial glia) as well as in wound healing.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biologySame topicS100 Proteins and AnnexinsFrench-language works237,207