MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132932506

The role of neural stem cells in stroke recovery

2004· dissertation· W7132932506 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mina M Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2004
Typedissertation
Language
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStem Cell NetworkCanadian Stroke Network
KeywordsStroke recoverySubependymal zoneNeural stem cellStroke (engine)Regeneration (biology)EndogenyStem cell
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The adult injured brain has been suggested to be capable of self-repair following stroke; however, the source of new neurons detected at the injury site and their role in functional recovery remain elusive. We hypothesized that subependymal (SE) precursors are the source of new cells that contribute to stroke recovery. To test this hypothesis we used proliferation markers to exclusively label SE cells prior to inducing stroke in the motor cortex. The labelled SE cells were tracked over the course of recovery to examine their contribution to newly formed tissue. SE cells were observed proliferating and migrating in response to exogenous growth factor infusion to contribute to new neurons and astrocytes within the ischemic infarct wherein new tissue directly linked to functional recovery developed. We conclude that endogenous SE precursors can be harnessed as an in vivo therapeutic strategy to promote regeneration of damaged tissue and thereby restore lost function.

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 score0.004

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms→French-language works237,207→