MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945542321 · doi:10.1139/bcb-2019-0045

The impact of epigenetics on cardiovascular disease

2019· review· en· W2945542321 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Dimple Prasher, Steven C. Greenway, Raja B. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry and Cell Biology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaAlberta Children's HospitalAlberta HealthUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpigeneticsDNA methylationDiseaseBiologyEpigenomeHistoneBioinformaticsEpigenesisGeneticsMedicineGeneGene expressionPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mortality and morbidity from cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) represents a huge burden to society. It is recognized that environmental factors and individual lifestyles play important roles in disease susceptibility, but the link between these external risk factors and our genetics has been unclear. However, the discovery of sequence-independent heritable DNA changes (epigenetics) have helped us to explain the link between genes and the environment. Multiple diverse epigenetic processes, including DNA methylation, histone modification, and the expression of non-coding RNA molecules affect the expression of genes that produce important changes in cellular differentiation and function, influencing the health and adaptability of the organism. CVDs such as congenital heart disease, cardiomyopathy, heart failure, cardiac fibrosis, hypertension, and atherosclerosis are now being viewed as much more complex and dynamic disorders. The role of epigenetics in these and other CVDs is currently under intense scrutiny, and we can expect important insights to emerge, including novel biomarkers and new approaches to enable precision medicine. This review summarizes the recent advances in our understanding of the role of epigenetics in CVD.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations135
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistry and Cell BiologySame topicEpigenetics and DNA MethylationFrench-language works237,207