MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765134536 · doi:10.1101/203554

Genomics in healthcare: GA4GH looks to 2022

2017· preprint· en· W2765134536 on OpenAlex
Ewan Birney, Jessica Vamathevan, Peter Goodhand

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.

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenomicsHealth careContext (archaeology)Big dataData sciencePreparednessBusinessGenomePolitical scienceComputer scienceBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH), the standards-setting body in genomics for healthcare, aims to accelerate biomedical advancement globally. We describe the differences between healthcare- and research-driven genomics, discuss the implications of global, population-scale collections of human data for research, and outline mission-critical considerations in ethics, regulation, technology, data protection, and society. We present a crude model for estimating the rate of healthcare-funded genomes worldwide that accounts for the preparedness of each country for genomics, and infers a progression of cancer-related sequencing over time. We estimate that over 60 million patients will have their genome sequenced in a healthcare context by 2025. This represents a large technical challenge for healthcare systems, and a huge opportunity for research. We identify eight major practical, principled arguments to support the position that virtual cohorts of 100 million people or more would have tangible research benefits.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.009
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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.255 · 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