MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047005510 · doi:10.1517/17530050902721215

Large-scale studies to identify biomarkers for heart disease: a role for proteomics?

2009· article· en· W2047005510 on OpenAlexaff
Shaan Chugh, Peter Liu, Andrew Emili, Anthony O. Gramolini

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Medical Diagnostics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkHeart and Stroke FoundationUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseProteomicsMedicineProteomeBiomarker discoveryProfiling (computer programming)Clinical PracticeData scienceBioinformaticsIntensive care medicineComputational biologyComputer sciencePathologyBiologyPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In clinical practice, timely detection of disease and accurate diagnosis are highly important for the effective treatment of various patient populations. Biomarkers offer a new and innovative means of assessing the disease state during early, mid and late stages of progression. OBJECTIVE: Advancements in various proteomic platforms used to study the disease proteome and their applications to the field of clinical medicine are reviewed. METHODS: A literature review was done to study proteomic technology and its contribution to the discovery of cardiac biomarkers. CONCLUSION: Proteomic profiling experiments can allow for the establishment of cardiac biomarkers, which can often offer information regarding the severity of the disease state. As high-throughput evaluation of various cardiac disease proteomes continues to improve in precision, the prospect of offering medical treatment that is tailored to the individual could follow.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.374 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Medical DiagnosticsSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207