MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292451715 · doi:10.1097/mcc.0000000000000966

The role of proteomics and metabolomics in severe infections

2022· review· en· W4292451715 on OpenAlexaff
Pedro Póvoa, Lieuwe D. J. Bos, Luís Coelho

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Critical Care · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetabolomicsProteomicsIntensive care medicineComputational biologyData scienceBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Severe infections are a common cause of ICU admission, with a high morbidity and mortality. Omics, namely proteomics and metabolomics, aim to identify, characterize, and quantify biological molecules to achieve a systems-level understanding of disease. The aim of this review is to provide a clear overview of the current evidence of the role of proteomics and metabolomics in severe infections. RECENT FINDINGS: Proteomics and metabolomics are technologies that are being used to explore new markers of diagnosis and prognosis, clarify mechanisms of disease, and consequently discover potential targets of therapy and finally of a better disease phenotyping. These technologies are starting to be used but not yet in clinical use. SUMMARY: Our traditional way of approaching the disease as sepsis is believing that a process can be broken into its parts and that the whole can be explained by the sum of each part. This approach is highly reductionist and does not take the system complexity nor the nonlinear dynamics of the processes. Proteomics and metabolomics allow the analysis of several proteins and metabolites simultaneously, thereby generating diagnostic and prognostic signatures. An exciting future prospect for proteomics and metabolomics is their employment towards precision medicine.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Critical CareSame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207