Protocol for Biospecimen Collection and Analysis Within the BACPAC Research Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Biospecimen Collection and Processing Working Group of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) HEAL Initiative BACPAC Research Program was charged with identifying molecular biomarkers of interest to chronic low back pain (cLBP). Having identified biomarkers of interest, the Working Group worked with the New York University Grossman School of Medicine, Center for Biospecimen Research and Development-funded by the Early Phase Pain Investigation Clinical Network Data Coordinating Center-to harmonize consortium-wide and site-specific efforts for biospecimen collection and analysis. Biospecimen collected are saliva, blood (whole, plasma, serum), urine, stool, and spine tissue (paraspinal muscle, ligamentum flavum, vertebral bone, facet cartilage, disc endplate, annulus fibrosus, or nucleus pulposus). The omics data acquisition and analyses derived from the biospecimen include genomics and epigenetics from DNA, proteomics from protein, transcriptomics from RNA, and microbiomics from 16S rRNA. These analyses contribute to the overarching goal of BACPAC to phenotype cLBP and will guide future efforts for precision medicine treatment.
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 | 0.031 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.159 | 0.073 |
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".