MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132883527

Characterizing the Window of Vulnerability in a Mouse Model of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

2022· dissertation· W7132883527 on OpenAlexaff
Prashanth Surjeet Velayudhan

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2022
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Traumatic brain injuryWhite matterWindow of opportunityWindow (computing)Affect (linguistics)Predictive valueTherapeutic window
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following one mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), there is a window of vulnerability during which subsequent mTBIs can cause exacerbated impairments. I characterized this window in mice by giving them one or two mTBIs separated by various intervals and measuring their resulting behavioural impairment using the Y-maze, visual cliff, and novel object recognition tests as well as their white matter pathology by silver staining. The window of vulnerability following our lab’s mTBI model was over 2 weeks when defined by silver staining but was not detectable when defined by behavioural testing. I also found that sex and impact severity differentially affect post-mTBI vulnerability in different white matter regions. This work highlights the value of including white matter damage, sex, and replicable mTBI models for the study of post-mTBI vulnerability. As well, this work establishes important groundwork for the future investigation of mechanisms, biomarkers, and therapies for post-mTBI vulnerability.

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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→