MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038325414 · doi:10.2217/bmm.09.22

Combining Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy and Mass Spectrometry in Biomarker Discovery

2009· article· en· W2038325414 on OpenAlexaff
GA Nagana Gowda, Omkar B. Ijare, Narasimhamurthy Shanaiah, Tedros Bezabeh

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomarkers in Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Institute for Biodiagnostics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMass spectrometryMetabolomicsBiomarker discoveryNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyNuclear magnetic resonanceComputational biologyMedicineProteomicsBioinformaticsChemistryPhysicsBiologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metabolic profiling of biological specimens is emerging as a promising approach for discovering specific biomarkers in the diagnosis of a number of diseases. Amongst many analytical techniques, nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and mass spectrometry are the most information-rich tools that enable high-throughput and global analysis of hundreds of metabolites in a single step. Although only one of the two techniques is utilized in a majority of metabolomics applications, there is a growing interest in combining the data from the two methods to effectively unravel the mammoth complexity of biological samples. In this article, current developments in nuclear magnetic resonance, mass spectrometry and multivariate statistical analysis methods are described. While some general applications that utilize the combination of the two analytical methods are presented briefly, the emphasis is laid on the recent applications of nuclear magnetic resonance and mass spectrometry methods in the studies of hepatopancreatobiliary and gastrointestinal malignancies.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomarkers in MedicineSame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207