MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768318977 · doi:10.1089/omi.2017.0141

Genomic Medicine Without Borders: Which Strategies Should Developing Countries Employ to Invest in Precision Medicine? A New “Fast-Second Winner” Strategy

2017· article· en· W2768318977 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueOMICS A Journal of Integrative Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsGenome British Columbia
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteUnited Arab Emirates University
KeywordsPrecision medicineGenomic medicinePersonalized medicineComputer scienceBusinessBiologyComputational biologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genomic medicine has greatly matured in terms of its technical capabilities, but the diffusion of genomic innovations worldwide faces significant barriers beyond mere access to technology. New global development strategies are sorely needed for biotechnologies such as genomics and their applications toward precision medicine without borders. Moreover, diffusion of genomic medicine globally cannot adhere to a "one-size-fits-all-countries" development strategy, in the same way that drug treatments should be customized. This begs a timely, difficult but crucial question: How should developing countries, and the resource-limited regions of developed countries, invest in genomic medicine? Although a full-scale investment in infrastructure from discovery to the translational implementation of genomic science is ideal, this may not always be feasible in all countries at all times. A simple "transplantation of genomics" from developed to developing countries is unlikely to be feasible. Nor should developing countries be seen as simple recipients and beneficiaries of genomic medicine developed elsewhere because important advances in genomic medicine have materialized in developing countries as well. There are several noteworthy examples of genomic medicine success stories involving resource-limited settings that are contextualized and described in this global genomic medicine innovation analysis. In addition, we outline here a new long-term development strategy for global genomic medicine in a way that recognizes the individual country's pressing public health priorities and disease burdens. We term this approach the "Fast-Second Winner" model of innovation that supports innovation commencing not only "upstream" of discovery science but also "mid-stream," building on emerging highly promising biomarker and diagnostic candidates from the global science discovery pipeline, based on the unique needs of each country. A mid-stream entry into innovation can enhance collective learning from other innovators' mistakes upstream in discovery science and boost the probability of success for translation and implementation when resources are limited. This à la carte model of global innovation and development strategy offers multiple entry points into the global genomics innovation ecosystem for developing countries, whether or not extensive and expensive discovery infrastructures are already in place. Ultimately, broadening our thinking beyond the linear model of innovation will help us to enable the vision and practice of genomics without borders in both developed and resource-limited settings.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.261 · 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