Impact of the Human Genome Project on Pediatric Endocrinology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A genomic approach to human biology involves examination of the entire complement of human genes and their protein products in contradistinction to the conventional phenomena-driven examination of individual components, one at a time. This approach may have limitations, but it also has the potential to increase our knowledge by an order of magnitude or more. It is expected that it will leave no field of biology and medicine unaffected, and this includes endocrinology. The structural and functional aspects of the human genome are reviewed, and the nature of the novel knowledge from the genome effort (acquired or expected) is described. More importantly, an overview is given of new ways of thinking and new approaches to endocrine research using genomic concepts and tools. Although these research breakthroughs have relatively few applications in clinical practice at the present moment, the clinician must expect drastic changes in diagnostics and therapeutics in the next decade or two, and endocrine- specific examples of such applications are given. Finally, the question is raised of social and ethical issues that these developments are generating.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".