MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379599550 · doi:10.1093/icb/icad058

Natural Animal Populations as Model Systems for Understanding Early Life Adversity Effects on Aging

2023· article· en· W4379599550 on OpenAlexaff
Sam K. Patterson, Rachel M. Petersen, Lauren J. N. Brent, Noah Snyder‐Mackler, Amanda J. Lea, James P. Higham

Bibliographic record

VenueIntegrative and Comparative Biology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsConfoundingNatural (archaeology)DiseasePsychologyHuman healthHealthy agingGerontologyBiologyMedicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adverse experiences in early life are associated with aging-related disease risk and mortality across many species. In humans, confounding factors, as well as the difficulty of directly measuring experiences and outcomes from birth till death, make it challenging to identify how early life adversity impacts aging and health. These challenges can be mitigated, in part, through the study of non-human animals, which are exposed to parallel forms of adversity and can age similarly to humans. Furthermore, studying the links between early life adversity and aging in natural populations of non-human animals provides an excellent opportunity to better understand the social and ecological pressures that shaped the evolution of early life sensitivities. Here, we highlight ongoing and future research directions that we believe will most effectively contribute to our understanding of the evolution of early life sensitivities and their repercussions.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntegrative and Comparative BiologySame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207