Progress and Research Priorities in Imaging Genomics for Heart and Lung Disease: Summary of an NHLBI Workshop
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Imaging genomics is a rapidly evolving field that combines state-of-the-art bioimaging with genomic information to resolve phenotypic heterogeneity associated with genomic variation, improve risk prediction, discover prevention approaches, and enable precision diagnosis and treatment. Contemporary bioimaging methods provide exceptional resolution generating discrete and quantitative high-dimensional phenotypes for genomics investigation. Despite substantial progress in combining high-dimensional bioimaging and genomic data, methods for imaging genomics are evolving. Recognizing the potential impact of imaging genomics on the study of heart and lung disease, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened a workshop to review cutting-edge approaches and methodologies in imaging genomics studies, and to establish research priorities for future investigation. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions at the workshop. In particular, we highlight the need for increased availability of imaging genomics data in diverse populations, dedicated focus on less common conditions, and centralization of efforts around specific disease areas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".