Genomic Prediction and its Association with the Development of Dementia disease in the Elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dementia is a severe neurological disorder involving complex interactions between various genetic and environmental factors. This paper explores the association between genomic prediction and the development of dementia in the elderly. Through a systematic review of existing research, the study delves into genomics, the genetic basis of dementia, and the etiology related to the genome. The research further examines the methods and applications of genomic prediction, focusing on the use of polygenic risk scores and machine learning algorithms in dementia studies. Through case analyses of large-scale genomic studies, key genes associated with dementia, such as Alzheimer's disease, are revealed. Additionally, the paper thoroughly analyzes the major findings of existing research, emphasizing the filling of knowledge gaps and the provision of new insights. Finally, the paper discusses the challenges faced by genomic prediction, including methodological difficulties, challenges in data interpretation, ethical and privacy concerns, and more. Looking ahead to future research directions, the paper highlights the establishment of personalized genomic prediction models, the application of new technologies, and the potential value of genomic prediction in early diagnosis and prevention of dementia.
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 | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".