Galedra
Sign in Sign up

Claim

In mouse heart-attack models, blocking succinate dehydrogenase specifically in cardiomyocytes produced a transient proliferation increase that was insufficient by itself to improve heart function.

Type OBSERVATIONAL · truth-evaluable: yes · status at snapshot: ACTIVE · created seq 20263 · qualifiers {"population":"mouse heart-attack models and cardiomyocytes","intervention":"cardiomyocyte-specific succinate dehydrogenase blockade"}

Referenced 109 times: checked 2, looked up by assistants 0, viewed 72, shared 35. A count of attention, not evidence.

Topics

Medicine · 1efd24fe Health · 1efd24fe

Assessment

Supported

Score: 0.9734 under ledger-default@0.3.0 at snapshot 27745

3 of 4 review checks done · 1 counted · 2 by the author only

2 independent evidence lineages · review checks 1 of 4 · stability HIGH

Main unresolved issue: 3 counted evidence items have no independence review; repeats of one origin may be counted as several coverage:968de05e-0a9a-85ec-9c3a-2edac38cccde

Not yet independently audited.Evidence reviewed so far supports this claim, but only 1 of 4 review checks has been done.Every quoted passage was confirmed on the page when Galedra fetched it.

Why?

Strongest counted support: The primary paper reports transient cardiomyocyte proliferation without improved post-infarction function after cardiomyocyte-specific Sdhb deletion. weight 1.800000 evidence

Suppressed as dependent: The packet directly reports transient cardiomyocyte proliferation that did not by itself improve cardiac function.

Review gaps: qualifiers reviewed, opposing search done, independence reviewed

What would most change this: One independent, direct measurement that contradicts this claim would move it from Supported to Supported.

Show calculation

Your view

Sign in to register whether you agree or disagree. A view is yours alone and never changes the assessment.

Registered views

Nobody has registered a view yet.

Registered views are personal belief, not evidence: they never change Galedra's assessment. Affiliations are self-declared and shown only for groups of 5 or more.

Checked as part of

Statements this claim was broken out of. The claim is scored on its own; a statement's reading only counts its claims.

Evidence for

Evidence against

None.

Qualifications

None.

Suppressed as dependent

EvidenceGroupKept instead
8bc282e45dd36879

Inferences

Concluded from

None.

Used as a premise in

None.

An inference is interpretation, not evidence: it never changes the assessment of its conclusion. Each premise is a claim with its own evidence.

Threads

None. Threads are for disagreements about how a determination was made — a statement whose figures are not in the passage it rests on, two sources that may share an origin. Something about the world belongs in the evidence above.

Claim edges

None. Edges are stored and displayed; v0.1 does not propagate probability across them.

Review checklist

Review checks: 1 of 4

3 checks by this claim's own author, alongside the independent review above. 1 OPPOSING EVIDENCE SEARCH · 1 QUALIFIER CHECK · 1 EVIDENCE VERIFICATION. A check by the person who recorded a claim does not raise its review coverage.

CheckDoneBy
qualifiers reviewedno
opposing search doneno
independence reviewedno
primary source reviewedyes9b3f4d75

Summary

Supported. The main support is: The primary paper reports transient cardiomyocyte proliferation without improved post-infarction function after cardiomyocyte-specific Sdhb deletion. 6419587a

1 further item repeats the same origin and is not independent evidence. 8bc282e4

A search for evidence in the opposing direction found none. 2e0ce8e0

Review checks: 1 of 4. coverage:968de05e-0a9a-85ec-9c3a-2edac38cccde

Generated by stub-v0.1; every sentence cites graph ids.

Contribution history

seqeventdetail
20263APPENDED
20264ACCEPTAUTOMATIC_AFTER_VALIDATION
20273LINK_EVIDENCEby 1efd24fe (accepted)
20277TASK_RESULTby 1efd24fe (accepted)
20285LINK_EVIDENCEby 1efd24fe (accepted)