MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041144562 · doi:10.1586/14789450.2013.856763

Targeted quantitation of CVD-linked plasma proteins for biomarker verification and validation

2013· review· en· W2041144562 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew J. Percy, Simon Byrns, Andrew G. Chambers, Christoph H. Borchers

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Proteomics · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of VictoriaGenome British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomarkerBiomarker discoveryMedicineDiseaseProteomicsComputational biologyBioinformaticsInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite significant advances in treatment, cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in developed and developing countries. Judicious monitoring of common risk factors has been unable to control this global epidemic, necessitating novel biomarkers for improved screening and earlier disease detection and management. Although numerous plasma proteins have been associated with CVD, only a few of these potential biomarkers have been validated for clinical use. Here we review the quantitative proteomic methods used to verify and validate new biomarker candidates in human plasma. These methods center on a bottom-up approach involving multiple or selected reaction monitoring, for targeted detection, with stable isotope-labeled standards, for peptide normalization. Also included are a discussion of future strategies for improved CVD protein biomarker verification and validation, recommendations for method translation to the clinic, and future projections for protein biomarker research.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.005

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of ProteomicsSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207