MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391486981 · doi:10.3390/pr12020316

Review of the Potential of Probiotics in Disease Treatment: Mechanisms, Engineering, and Applications

2024· article· en· W4391486981 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProcesses · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersScience, Technology and Innovation Commission of Shenzhen Municipality
KeywordsProbioticDiseaseHuman healthHealth benefitsIntensive care medicineMedicineBiotechnologyBiologyEnvironmental healthPathologyTraditional medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Probiotics, living microorganisms with demonstrated health benefits when administered in sufficient quantities, have a rich history as dietary supplements to benefit human health. Recently, understanding of their mechanisms in the gastrointestinal tract has prompted exploration of probiotics in treating human diseases. However, the effective and precise delivery of probiotics remains a significant challenge in therapeutic applications. Here, we review the mechanisms of action of probiotics in human health and the most advanced strategies for efficient probiotic delivery. We also discuss the potential applications of engineered probiotics in disease treatment. This review contributes insights into the evolving landscape of probiotic research for therapeutic applications.

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.199 · 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