MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Why Are Bifidobacteria Important for Infants?

2022· review· en· W4210754953 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroorganisms · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInfant Health and Development
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsBifidobacteriumBiologyEvolutionary biologyCommunicationGeographyPsychologyBacteriaGeneticsLactobacillus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of Bifidobacterium species in the maternal vaginal and fecal microbiota is arguably an evolutionary trait that allows these organisms to be primary colonizers of the newborn intestinal tract. Their ability to utilize human milk oligosaccharides fosters their establishment as core health-promoting organisms throughout life. A reduction in their abundance in infants has been shown to increase the prevalence of obesity, diabetes, metabolic disorder, and all-cause mortality later in life. Probiotic strains have been developed as supplements for premature babies and to counter some of these ailments as well as to confer a range of health benefits. The ability to modulate the immune response and produce short-chain fatty acids, particularly acetate and butyrate, that strengthen the gut barrier and regulate the gut microbiome, makes Bifidobacterium a core component of a healthy infant through adulthood.

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), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.320 · 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