Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies have led to a broader understanding of the genetic architecture of coronary artery disease and demonstrate that it largely derives from the cumulative effect of multiple common risk alleles individually of small effect size rather than rare variants with large effects on coronary artery disease risk. The tools applied include genome-wide association studies encompassing over 200 000 individuals complemented by bioinformatic approaches including imputation from whole-genome data sets, expression quantitative trait loci analyses, and interrogation of ENCODE (Encyclopedia of DNA Elements), Roadmap Epigenetic Project, and other data sets. Over 160 genome-wide significant loci associated with coronary artery disease risk have been identified using the genome-wide association studies approach, 90% of which are situated in intergenic regions. Here, I will describe, in part, our research over the last decade performed in collaboration with a series of bright trainees and an extensive number of groups and individuals around the world as it applies to our understanding of the genetic basis of this complex disease. These studies include computational approaches to better understand missing heritability and identify causal pathways, experimental approaches, and progress in understanding at the molecular level the function of the multiple risk loci identified and potential applications of these genomic data in clinical medicine and drug discovery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.106 | 0.074 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".