MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620042743 · doi:10.3389/fped.2017.00111

Early-Life Host–Microbiome Interphase: The Key Frontier for Immune Development

2017· review· en· W2620042743 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pediatrics · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMicrobiomeImmune systemWindow of opportunityHuman microbiomeDiseaseImmunologyDysbiosisBiologyMedicineBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

." A healthy interaction of the human host with the microbes in and around us heavily relies on a well-functioning immune system. As development of both the microbiota and the host immune system undergo rapid changes in early life, it is not surprising that even minor alterations during this co-development can have profound consequences. Scrutiny of existing data regarding pre-, peri-, as well as early postnatal modulators of newborn microbiota indeed suggest strong associations with several immune-mediated diseases with onset far beyond the newborn period. We here summarize these data and extract overarching themes. This same effort in turn sets the stage to guide effective countermeasures, such as probiotic administration. The objective of our review is to highlight the interaction of host immune ontogeny with the developing microbiome in early life as a critical window of susceptibility for lifelong disease, as well as to identify the enormous potential to protect and promote lifelong health by specifically targeting this window of opportunity.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.290 · 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