MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2558440667 · doi:10.1007/s40121-016-0138-6

The Potential of Omics Technologies in Lyme Disease Biomarker Discovery and Early Detection

2016· review· en· W2558440667 on OpenAlexafffund
Alaa Badawi

Bibliographic record

VenueInfectious Diseases and Therapy · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicVector-borne infectious diseases
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsDiseaseOmicsMedicineProteomicsLyme diseaseBiomarkerBiomarker discoveryMetabolomicsBioinformaticsMicrobiomeComputational biologyImmunologyBiologyPathologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lyme borreliosis (LB) is the most prevalent arthropod-borne infectious disease in North America and many countries of the temperate Northern Hemisphere. It is associated with local and systemic manifestations and has persistent post-treatment health complications in some individuals. Innate and acquired immunity-related inflammation is likely to play a critical role in both host defense against Borrelia burgdorferi and disease severity. Large-scale analytical approaches to quantify gene expression (transcriptomics), proteins (proteomics) and metabolites (metabolomics) in LB have recently emerged with a potential to advance the development of disease biomarkers in early, disseminated and posttreatment disease stages. These technologies may permit defining the disease stage and facilitate its early detection to improve diagnosis. They will also likely allow elucidating the underlying molecular pathways to aid in identifying molecular targets for therapy. This article reviews the findings within the field of omics relevant to LB and its prospective utility in developing an array of biomarkers that can be employed in LB diagnosis and detection particularly at the early disease stages.

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)0.002
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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfectious Diseases and TherapySame topicVector-borne infectious diseasesFrench-language works237,207