A graph-embedded topic model enables characterization of diverse pain phenotypes among UK biobank individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large biobank repositories of clinical conditions and medications data open opportunities to investigate the phenotypic disease network. We present a graph embedded topic model (GETM). We integrate existing biomedical knowledge graph information in the form of pre-trained graph embedding into the embedded topic model. Via a variational autoencoder framework, we infer patient phenotypic mixture by modeling multi-modal discrete patient medical records. We applied GETM to UK Biobank (UKB) self-reported clinical phenotype data, which contains 443 self-reported medical conditions and 802 medications for 457,461 individuals. Compared to existing methods, GETM demonstrates good imputation performance. With a more focused application on characterizing pain phenotypes, we observe that GETM-inferred phenotypes not only accurately predict the status of chronic musculoskeletal (CMK) pain but also reveal known pain-related topics. Intriguingly, medications and conditions in the cardiovascular category are enriched among the most predictive topics of chronic pain.
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 | 0.000 | 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".