Gene-gene and gene-environment interactions: new insights into the prevention, detection and management of coronary artery disease
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the recent success of genome-wide association studies (GWASs) in identifying loci consistently associated with coronary artery disease (CAD), a large proportion of the genetic components of CAD and its metabolic risk factors, including plasma lipids, type 2 diabetes and body mass index, remain unattributed. Gene-gene and gene-environment interactions might produce a meaningful improvement in quantification of the genetic determinants of CAD. Testing for gene-gene and gene-environment interactions is thus a new frontier for large-scale GWASs of CAD. There are several anecdotal examples of monogenic susceptibility to CAD in which the phenotype was worsened by an adverse environment. In addition, small-scale candidate gene association studies with functional hypotheses have identified gene-environment interactions. For future evaluation of gene-gene and gene-environment interactions to achieve the same success as the single gene associations reported in recent GWASs, it will be important to pre-specify agreed standards of study design and statistical power, environmental exposure measurement, phenomic characterization and analytical strategies. Here we discuss these issues, particularly in relation to the investigation and potential clinical utility of gene-gene and gene-environment interactions in CAD.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it