Scoping Review of the current literature on ground-based models investigating effects of whole-body Cosmic Radiaton exposure.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: As we set new ambitions for space exploration, notably putting man on Mars, understanding the risk posed to human health is paramount to achieve such extraordinary missions.Despite cosmic radiation being identified as a main concern, limited data is available on its effects due to technical challenges and small population samples.To expand on available knowledge and facilitate coordination for future research, this review was undertaken to comprehensively examine our existing data, methods and gaps in terrestrial analogs for cosmic radiation.Specifically, this review focuses on identifying the key literature exploring the effects of cosmic radiation via-ground based models in rodents.Methods: Using MEDLINE OVID, Embassy Classic and Global Health Journal as the primary database for article retrieval, a comprehensive framework was developed to both search, identify and label relevant papers in Covidence.Key variables such as rodent species, radiation type and major organ system affected were retrieved from pertinent articles.Results: Most studies utilized male mouse C57BL/6 strains as physiological models to study major physiological and behavioural effects on the nervous system with iron as the major radiation intervention.Other systems and models are understudied but the appearance of standardized irradiation protocols greatly increased the abundance of studies available. Conclusions:We have categorized the relevant studies and demonstrated areas of research with heavy contingency such as the nervous system in which meta-analysis can and have been performed.We have also identified gaps in knowledge that suggest focusing future studies on genetically diverse (outbred) animals, including side by side comparison of males and females, focusing on space mission-relevant radiation exposures, and comprehensively examining changes in all physiological systems.
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 | 0.010 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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.
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".