MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977460386 · doi:10.3390/nu11102375

The Gut Microbiota in Celiac Disease and probiotics

2019· review· en· W2977460386 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDysbiosisEnteropathyMicrobiomeDiseaseGut floraMedicineImmunologyGluten freeImmune systemGut microbiomeInflammatory bowel diseaseBiologyBioinformaticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Celiac disease (CeD) is an immune-mediated enteropathy, and unique in that the specific trigger is known: gluten. The current mainstay of therapy is a gluten-free diet (GFD). As novel therapies are being developed, complementary strategies are also being studied, such as modulation of the gut microbiome. The gut microbiota is involved in the initiation and perpetuation of intestinal inflammation in several chronic diseases. Intestinal dysbiosis has been reported in CeD patients, untreated or treated with GFD, compared to healthy subjects. Several studies have identified differential bacterial populations associated with CeD patients and healthy subjects. However, it is still not clear if intestinal dysbiosis is the cause or effect of CeD. Probiotics have also been considered as a strategy to modulate the gut microbiome to an anti-inflammatory state. However, there is a paucity of data to support their use in treating CeD. Further studies are needed with therapeutic microbial formulations combined with human trials on the use of probiotics to treat CeD by restoring the gut microbiome to an anti-inflammatory state.

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.

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 score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.320 · 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