MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026752946 · doi:10.1111/nmo.13884

Application of metabolomics to the study of irritable bowel syndrome

2020· review· en· W3026752946 on OpenAlexafffund
Sean Bennet, Ammar Hassanzadeh Keshteli, Přemysl Berčík, Karen Madsen, David E. Reed, Stephen Vanner

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurogastroenterology & Motility · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of AlbertaKingston General HospitalQueen's University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCrohn's and Colitis Canada
KeywordsIrritable bowel syndromeMetabolomicsMedicineInternal medicineBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pathophysiology of irritable bowel syndrome and the detection of biomarkers of specific mechanisms and/or predictors of therapeutic response remain elusive. This roadblock reflects, in large part, the complexity and heterogeneity of the disorder. Recently, there has been growing evidence of a dietary and/or microbiome interaction with the host that may trigger symptoms in a subset of patients. While a number of techniques are available to examine these potential interactions, "omic" approaches such as metabolomics are becoming more widely used. Metabolomics measures hundreds and potentially thousands of known and unknown small molecule chemicals (metabolites) to provide a unique look into mechanisms that underlie symptom generation and potential predictors of therapeutic response. In this issue of the journal, Lee et al use nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) to demonstrate the value of this approach to study IBS. This review examines the use of metabolomics to better understand IBS, focusing on what has been learned to date, practical and technical considerations, its potential for future research and how the study by Lee et al have contributed to these concepts.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurogastroenterology & MotilitySame topicDiet and metabolism studiesFrench-language works237,207