MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6996201469

Receptor Binding Profiles of Antipsychotic Medications and Glucose Dysregulation: An Acute Animal Model

2012· dissertation· en· W6996201469 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2012
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPrazosinReceptorAntipsychotic5-HT2A receptorButyrophenoneAntagonismInsulinDrugInsulin receptor
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) are associated with metabolic sequelae including risk of type 2 diabetes. Evidence points to a weight-gain independent and direct drug effect on glucose homeostasis. While the exact mechanisms remain elusive, the heterogeneous binding profiles of AAPs likely include receptors involved in glucose metabolism. We aimed to clarify weight-gain independent mechanisms of AAP-induced alterations in insulin secretion. Deconstruction of the receptor binding profiles of these agents was done using representative antagonists and the hyperglycemic clamp. We assessed the acute effects of several selective receptor antagonists on glucose metabolism, namely prazosin, idazoxan, MDL100907, SB242084 and WAY100635. Prazosin and MDL100907, selective α1 and 5HT2A antagonists, respectively, caused significant decreases in both insulin and C-peptide secretion. A decreased glucose infusion rate and disposition index was also found in the prazosin group. Antagonism of the α1 and 5HT2A receptors may be involved in AAP-induced glucose dysregulation, however, the responsible mechanisms remain unknown.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.355 · 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
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicSchizophrenia research and treatment→French-language works237,207→