MR metabolomics of fecal extracts: applications in the study of bowel diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
NMR-based metabolomics is becoming a useful tool in the study of body fluids and has a strong potential to contribute to disease diagnosis. While applications on urine and serum have been the focus to date, there are a number of other body fluids that are readily available and could potentially be used for metabolomics-based disease diagnosis. One such body fluid is stool or fecal extract. Given its contact with and transient stay in the colon and rectum, stool carries a lot of useful information regarding the health/disease status of both the colon and the rectum. This could be particularly useful for the non-invasive diagnosis of colorectal cancer and inflammatory bowel disease--the two bowel diseases that are very common and pose significant public health problems. Different methodological considerations including the collection of sample, the storage of sample, the preparation of sample, NMR acquisition parameters, experimental conditions and data analysis methods are discussed. Results obtained in the detection of colorectal cancer and in the differentiation of the two major forms of inflammatory bowel disease (i.e. ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease) are presented. This is concluded with a brief discussion on the future of MR metabolomics of fecal extracts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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".