MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280500719 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2022.104390

A graph-embedded topic model enables characterization of diverse pain phenotypes among UK biobank individuals

2022· article· en· W4280500719 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuening Wang, Rodrigo Benavides, Luda Diatchenko, Audrey V. Grant, Yue Li

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMedical Research CouncilMcGill University
KeywordsBiobankAutoencoderPhenotypeChronic painGraphComputer scienceMedicineData scienceData miningMachine learningArtificial intelligenceBioinformaticsTheoretical computer scienceArtificial neural networkPsychiatryGeneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207