MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132907720

Lithium protects the rodent amygdala from neuronal and molecular effects of chronic stress

2007· dissertation· W7132907720 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah A. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2007
Typedissertation
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCanadian HeritageLibrary and Archives Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLithium (medication)CREBNeuroprotectionAmygdalaNeuroplasticityBasolateral amygdalaChronic stressNeurotrophinNeurotrophic factors
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a debilitating psychiatric illness, yet its etiology remains poorly understood. Stress contributes to the emergence and recurrence of BD, therefore neuronal and molecular actions of the mood-stabilizing drug lithium were investigated using a chronic restraint stress (CRS) paradigm in rodents. Based on previous findings, it was hypothesized that lithium would protect the rat amygdala against stress-induced dendritic hypertrophy, as well as decreased levels of phosphorylated CREB (pCREB) protein and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) mRNA transcripts. As expected, lithium treatment prevented CRS-induced dendritic hypertrophy, and reversed a decrease in the number of pCREB-positive cells and density of pCREB-induced BDNF mRNA transcripts in the basolateral and lateral amygdala. The results of this thesis support the neuroprotection hypothesis of lithium action, and suggest that CRS is a useful model within which to study the effects of lithium on changes in neuroplasticity relevant to BD.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicBipolar Disorder and Treatment→French-language works237,207→