MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207856011 · doi:10.1128/msystems.00604-21

Chasing Ghosts: Race, Racism, and the Future of Microbiome Research

2021· article· en· W3207856011 on OpenAlexafffund
Travis J. De Wolfe, Mohammed Rafi Arefin, Amber Benezra, María Rebolleda‐Gómez

Bibliographic record

VenuemSystems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of California, IrvineDirectorate for Biological SciencesMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsMicrobiomeRace (biology)RacismHuman Microbiome ProjectHuman microbiomeField (mathematics)SociologyEnvironmental ethicsEpistemologyEngineering ethicsData scienceBiologyBioinformaticsComputer scienceGender studiesEngineeringPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we argue that a careful examination of human microbiome science's relationship with race and racism is necessary to foster equitable social and ecological relations in the field. We point to the origins and evolution of the problematic use of race in microbiome literature by demonstrating the increased usage of race both explicitly and implicitly in and beyond the human microbiome sciences. We demonstrate how these uses limit the future of rigorous and just microbiome research. We conclude with an outline of alternative actionable ways to build a more effective, antiracist microbiome science.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.056
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0560.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.054
Scholarly communication0.0120.024
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0050.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations64
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemSystemsSame topicGut microbiota and healthFrench-language works237,207