MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129038531 · doi:10.3389/fgene.2021.633731

Welfare Genome Project: A Participatory Korean Personal Genome Project With Free Health Check-Up and Genetic Report Followed by Counseling

2021· article· en· W3129038531 on OpenAlexaff
Yeonsu Jeon, Sungwon Jeon, Asta Blažytė, Yeo Jin Kim, Jasmin Junseo Lee, Youngjune Bhak, Yun Sung Cho, Yeshin Park, Eui‐Kyu Noh, Andrea Manica, Jeremy S. Edwards, Dan Bolser, Sukyeon Kim, Yuji Lee, Changhan Yoon, Semin Lee, Byung Chul Kim, Neung Hwa Park, Jong Bhak

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Genetics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersKorea Research Environment Open NetworkUlsan Metropolitan CityKorea Institute of Science and Technology InformationKorea Institute of Science and TechnologyUlsan National Institute of Science and Technology
KeywordsPersonal genomicsGenetic counselingHealth carePersonalized medicinePublic healthGenomicsGenetic testingMedicineGenomeGeneticsNursingBiologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Welfare Genome Project (WGP) provided 1,000 healthy Korean volunteers with detailed genetic and health reports to test the social perception of integrating personal genetic and healthcare data at a large-scale. WGP was launched in 2016 in the Ulsan Metropolitan City as the first large-scale genome project with public participation in Korea. The project produced a set of genetic materials, genotype information, clinical data, and lifestyle survey answers from participants aged 20-96. As compensation, the participants received a free general health check-up on 110 clinical traits, accompanied by a genetic report of their genotypes followed by genetic counseling. In a follow-up survey, 91.0% of the participants indicated that their genetic reports motivated them to improve their health. Overall, WGP expanded not only the general awareness of genomics, DNA sequencing technologies, bioinformatics, and bioethics regulations among all the parties involved, but also the general public's understanding of how genome projects can indirectly benefit their health and lifestyle management. WGP established a data construction framework for not only scientific research but also the welfare of participants. In the future, the WGP framework can help lay the groundwork for a new personalized healthcare system that is seamlessly integrated with existing public medical infrastructure.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in GeneticsSame topicHealth, Environment, Cognitive AgingFrench-language works237,207