MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392002384 · doi:10.3389/fnut.2024.1285502

Deficiencies in one-carbon metabolism led to increased neurological disease risk and worse outcome: homocysteine is a marker of disease state

2024· article· en· W4392002384 on OpenAlexaff
Sanika M. Joshi, Nafisa M. Jadavji

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Nutrition · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomocysteineDiseaseOxidative stressBioinformaticsMedicineCognitive declineRisk factorInternal medicineBiologyDementia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elevated plasma homocysteine levels have been identified as a significant, independent risk factor for the development of cognitive decline including Alzheimer's disease. While several studies have explored the link between homocysteine and disease risk, the associations have not been entirely clear. Elevated levels of homocysteine serve as a disease marker and understanding the underlying cause of these increased levels (e.g., dietary or genetic deficiency in one-carbon metabolism, 1C) will provide valuable insights into neurological disease risk and outcomes. Previous cell culture experiments investigating the mechanisms involved used ultra-high levels of homocysteine that are not observed in human patients. These studies have demonstrated the negative impacts of ultra-high levels of homocysteine can have on for example proliferation of neuroprogenitor cells in the adult hippocampus, as well as triggering neuronal apoptosis through a series of events, including DNA damage, PARP activation, NAD depletion, mitochondrial dysfunction, and oxidative stress. The aim of this mini-review article will summarize the literature on deficiencies in 1C and how they contribute to disease risk and outcomes and that homocysteine is a marker of disease.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NutritionSame topicFolate and B Vitamins ResearchFrench-language works237,207