MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205326239 · doi:10.3389/fmolb.2021.815410

Molecular Big Data in Sports Sciences: State-of-Art and Future Prospects of OMICS-Based Sports Sciences

2022· review· en· W4205326239 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

VenueFrontiers in Molecular Biosciences · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Physical Performance
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenomicsMetabolomicsBiobankFlexibility (engineering)Sports scienceOmicsProteomicsAthletesData scienceBiologyComputational biologyBioinformaticsComputer scienceMedicinePhysiologyGenomeGeneticsPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Together with environment and experience (that is to say, diet and training), the biological and genetic make-up of an athlete plays a major role in exercise physiology. Sports genomics has shown, indeed, that some DNA single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) can be associated with athlete performance and level (such as elite/world-class athletic status), having an impact on physical activity behavior, endurance, strength, power, speed, flexibility, energetic expenditure, neuromuscular coordination, metabolic and cardio-respiratory fitness, among others, as well as with psychological traits. Athletic phenotype is complex and depends on the combination of different traits and characteristics: as such, it requires a "complex science," like that of metadata and multi-OMICS profiles. Several projects and trials (like ELITE, GAMES, Gene SMART, GENESIS, and POWERGENE) are aimed at discovering genomics-based biomarkers with an adequate predictive power. Sports genomics could enable to optimize and maximize physical performance, as well as it could predict the risk of sports-related injuries. Exercise has a profound impact on proteome too. Proteomics can assess both from a qualitative and quantitative point of view the modifications induced by training. Recently, scholars have assessed the epigenetics changes in athletes. Summarizing, the different omics specialties seem to converge in a unique approach, termed sportomics or athlomics and defined as a "holistic and top-down," "non-hypothesis-driven research on an individual's metabolite changes during sports and exercise" (the Athlome Project Consortium and the Santorini Declaration) Not only sportomics includes metabonomics/metabolomics, but relying on the athlete's biological passport or profile, it would enable the systematic study of sports-induced changes and effects at any level (genome, transcriptome, proteome, etc.). However, the wealth of data is so huge and massive and heterogenous that new computational algorithms and protocols are needed, more computational power is required as well as new strategies for properly and effectively combining and integrating data.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.259 · 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