MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015015053 · doi:10.1194/jlr.r400002-jlr200

Genetics of LDL particle heterogeneity

2004· review· en· W2015015053 on OpenAlexaff
Yohan Bossé, Louis Përusse, Marie‐Claude Vohl

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lipid Research · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenetic architectureHeritabilityGenome-wide association studyBiologyTraitGenetic epidemiologyDiseaseGenetic linkageGeneticsMissing heritability problemCandidate geneQuantitative trait locusGenetic associationGenetic modelFamily aggregationGenetic heterogeneityEvolutionary biologyGeneGenetic variantsMedicineSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenotypePhenotypePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Substantial evidence exists suggesting that small, dense LDL particles are associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease. This disease-related risk factor is recognized to be under both genetic and environmental influences. Several studies have been conducted to elucidate the genetic architecture underlying this trait, and a review of this literature seems timely. The methods and strategies used to determine its genetic component and to identify the genes have greatly changed throughout the years owing to the progress made in genetic epidemiology and the influence of the Human Genome Project. Heritability studies, complex segregation analyses, candidate gene linkage and association studies, genome-wide linkage scans, and animal models are all part of the arsenal to determine the susceptibility genes. The compilation of these studies clearly revealed the complex genetic nature of LDL particles. This work is an attempt to summarize the growing evidence of genetic control on LDL particle heterogeneity with the aim of providing a concise overview in one read.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations42
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lipid ResearchSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207