MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365135972 · doi:10.1080/07853890.2023.2198255

Protocol for a nested case-control study design for omics investigations in the Environmental Determinants of Islet Autoimmunity cohort

2023· article· en· W4365135972 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Helena Oakey, Lynne Giles, Rebecca L. Thomson, Kim‐Anh Lê Cao, Pat Ashwood, James D. Brown, Emma R. Knight, Simon C. Barry, Maria E. Craig, Peter G. Colman, Elizabeth A. Davis, Emma E. Hamilton‐Williams, Leonard C. Harrison, Aveni Haynes, Ki Wook Kim, Kylie‐Ann Mallitt, Kelly McGorm, Grant Morahan, William D. Rawlinson, Richard Sinnott, Georgia Soldatos, John M. Wentworth, Jennifer Couper, Megan A. S. Penno

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiabetes and associated disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilBarwon Health FoundationMedical Research Future FundUniversity of AdelaideUniversity of New South WalesJuvenile Diabetes Research Foundation AustraliaJuvenile Diabetes Research Foundation United States of AmericaMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadMountain Equipment Co-operativeLeona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust
KeywordsOmicsAutoimmunityType 1 diabetesPregnancyCohortMedicineCohort studyAutoantibodyCase-control studyImmunologyDiabetes mellitusBioinformaticsInternal medicineBiologyAntibodyEndocrinologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The Environmental Determinants of Islet Autoimmunity (ENDIA) pregnancy-birth cohort investigates the developmental origins of type 1 diabetes (T1D), with recruitment between 2013 and 2019. ENDIA is the first study in the world with comprehensive data and biospecimen collection during pregnancy, at birth and through childhood from at-risk children who have a first-degree relative with T1D. Environmental exposures are thought to drive the progression to clinical T1D, with pancreatic islet autoimmunity (IA) developing in genetically susceptible individuals. The exposures and key molecular mechanisms driving this progression are unknown. Persistent IA is the primary outcome of ENDIA; defined as a positive antibody for at least one of IAA, GAD, ZnT8 or IA2 on two consecutive occasions and signifies high risk of clinical T1D.Method: A nested case-control (NCC) study design with 54 cases and 161 matched controls aims to investigate associations between persistent IA and longitudinal omics exposures in ENDIA. The NCC study will analyse samples obtained from ENDIA children who have either developed persistent IA or progressed to clinical T1D (cases) and matched control children at risk of developing persistent IA. Control children were matched on sex and age, with all four autoantibodies absent within a defined window of the case’s onset date. Cases seroconverted at a median of 1.37 years (IQR 0.95, 2.56). Longitudinal omics data generated from approximately 16,000 samples of different biospecimen types, will enable evaluation of changes from pregnancy through childhood.Conclusions: This paper describes the ENDIA NCC study, omics platform design considerations and planned univariate and multivariate analyses for its longitudinal data. Methodologies for multivariate omics analysis with longitudinal data are discovery-focused and data driven. There is currently no single multivariate method tailored specifically for the longitudinal omics data that the ENDIA NCC study will generate and therefore omics analysis results will require either cross validation or independent validation.KEY MESSAGESThe ENDIA nested case-control study will utilize longitudinal omics data on approximately 16,000 samples from 190 unique children at risk of type 1 diabetes (T1D), including 54 who have developed islet autoimmunity (IA), followed during pregnancy, at birth and during early childhood, enabling the developmental origins of T1D to be explored.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0760.017

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of MedicineSame topicDiabetes and associated disordersFrench-language works237,207