Global and Partial Effect Assessment in Metabolic Syndrome Explored by Metabolomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In nutrition and health research, untargeted metabolomics is actually analyzed simultaneously with clinical data to improve prediction and better understand pathological status. This can be modeled using a multiblock supervised model with several input data blocks (metabolomics, clinical data) being potential predictors of the outcome to be explained. Alternatively, this configuration can be represented with a path diagram where the input blocks are each connected by links directed to the outcome-as in multiblock supervised modeling-and are also related to each other, thus allowing one to account for block effects. On the basis of a path model, we show herein how to estimate the effect of an input block, either on its own or conditionally to other(s), on the output response, respectively called "global" and "partial" effects, by percentages of explained variance in dedicated PLS regression models. These effects have been computed in two different path diagrams in a case study relative to metabolic syndrome, involving metabolomics and clinical data from an older men's cohort (NuAge). From the two effects associated with each path, the results highlighted the complementary information provided by metabolomics to clinical data and, reciprocally, in the metabolic syndrome exploration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".