MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316664471 · doi:10.3390/cancers15020521

Host Microbiomes Influence the Effects of Diet on Inflammation and Cancer

2023· review· en· W4316664471 on OpenAlexafffund
Ramsha Mahmood, Athalia Voisin, Hana Olof, Reihane Khorasaniha, Samuel Adefisoye Lawal, Heather Armstrong

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsCanada Research ChairsWeston Family FoundationManitoba Medical Service Foundation
KeywordsMicrobiomeCarcinogenesisInflammationImmune systemCancerBiologyImmunologyTumor microenvironmentBioinformaticsMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer is the second leading cause of death globally, and there is a growing appreciation for the complex involvement of diet, microbiomes, and inflammatory processes culminating in tumorigenesis. Although research has significantly improved our understanding of the various factors involved in different cancers, the underlying mechanisms through which these factors influence tumor cells and their microenvironment remain to be completely understood. In particular, interactions between the different microbiomes, specific dietary factors, and host cells mediate both local and systemic immune responses, thereby influencing inflammation and tumorigenesis. Developing an improved understanding of how different microbiomes, beyond just the colonic microbiome, can interact with dietary factors to influence inflammatory processes and tumorigenesis will support our ability to better understand the potential for microbe-altering and dietary interventions for these patients in future.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicGut microbiota and healthFrench-language works237,207