MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769900543 · doi:10.1093/nutrit/nux053

Developmental origins of health and disease: current knowledge and potential mechanisms

2017· review· en· W2769900543 on OpenAlexaff
Daniël J. Hoffman, Rebecca M. Reynolds, Daniel B. Hardy

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition Reviews · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsDiseaseBiologyMalnutritionEpigeneticsGerontologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychologyMedicineGeneticsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epidemiologic and clinical research has provided a large body of evidence supporting the developmental origins of health and disease (DOHaD), but there has been a relative dearth of mechanistic studies in humans due to the complexity of working with large, longitudinal cohorts. Nonetheless, animal models of undernutrition have provided substantial evidence for the potential epigenetic, metabolic, and endocrine mechanisms behind DOHaD. Furthermore, recent research has explored the interaction between the environment and the gastrointestinal system by investigating how the gut microbial ecology may impact the capacity for nutrient processing and absorption in a manner that may limit growth. This review presents a summary of current research that supports the concept of DOHaD, as well as potential mechanisms and interactions that explain how nutrition in utero and during early childhood influences lifelong health.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations353
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition ReviewsSame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207