Appraisal of Gene-Environment Interactions in GWAS for Evidence-Based Precision Nutrition Implementation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to analyse the currently reported gene-environment (G × E) interactions in genome-wide association studies (GWAS), involving environmental factors such as lifestyle and dietary habits related to metabolic syndrome phenotypes. For this purpose, the present manuscript reviews the available GWAS registered on the GWAS Catalog reporting the interaction between environmental factors and metabolic syndrome traits. RECENT FINDINGS: Advances in omics-related analytical and computational approaches in recent years have led to a better understanding of the biological processes underlying these G × E interactions. A total of 42 GWAS were analysed, reporting over 300 loci interacting with environmental factors. Alcohol consumption, sleep time, smoking habit and physical activity were the most studied environmental factors with significant G × E interactions. The implementation of more comprehensive GWAS will provide a better understanding of the metabolic processes that determine individual responses to environmental exposures and their association with the development of chronic diseases such as obesity and the metabolic syndrome. This will facilitate the development of precision approaches for better prevention, management and treatment of these diseases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".