MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2925329803 · doi:10.3390/challe10010023

Multiomics and Systems Biology Are Needed to Unravel the Complex Origins of Chronic Disease

2019· article· en· W2925329803 on OpenAlexaff
David Martino, Rym Ben-Othman, Danny Harbeson, Anthony Bosco

Bibliographic record

VenueChallenges · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiabetes and associated disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseSystems biologyOmicsImmune dysregulationData scienceDomain (mathematical analysis)Immune systemChronic diseaseBiologyComputational biologyCognitive scienceMedicinePsychologyComputer scienceBioinformaticsImmunologyIntensive care medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modernization has now been linked to poor developmental experience, the onset of immune dysregulation and rising rates of chronic diseases in many parts of the world. Research across the epidemiological, clinical, and basic science domains supports the concept that poor developmental experience, particularly during prenatal life, can increase the risk of chronic disease, with enduring effects on long-term health. Single ‘omics’ approaches are ill-suited to dealing with the level of complexity that underpins immune dysregulation in early life. A more comprehensive systems-level view is afforded by combining multiple ‘omics’ datasets in order to delineate correlations across multiple resolutions of the genome, and of the genomes of the microorganisms that inhabit us. In this concept paper, we discuss multiomic approaches to studying immune dysregulation and highlight some of the challenges and opportunities afforded by this new domain of medical science.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.016
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0050.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChallengesSame topicDiabetes and associated disordersFrench-language works237,207