miRNAs as biomarkers of orofacial clefts: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Orofacial clefts are facial malformations caused by the improper development of the lips and palate. Many genetic and epigenetic molecules have been involved in the mechanisms of orofacial clefts, one of which are miRNAs. This systematic review aimed to identify miRNAs associated to non-syndromic orofacial clefts in humans. After applying a series of criteria, four studies were selected for analysis. In total, one hundred miRNAs were observed in the literature, of which 57 were reported as upregulated and 43 as downregulated in all orofacial cleft classifications. Moreover, nine miRNAs were differentially expressed only in cleft palate patients, which might suggest distinct regulatory mechanisms for the etiology of cleft lips and palates. We suggest broader population sampling in order to include diverse ethnic groups in the future, as well as analyses toward identifying miRNA target genes and pathways. We highlight the need for experimental validation and of these results to allow further translational approaches and clinical applications.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".