Protocol to identify biomarkers in patients with post-COVID condition using multi-omics and machine learning analysis of human plasma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here, we present a workflow for analyzing multi-omics data of plasma samples in patients with post-COVID condition (PCC). Applicable to various diseases, we outline steps for data preprocessing and integrating diverse assay datasets. Then, we detail statistical analysis to unveil plasma profile changes and identify biomarker-clinical variable associations. The last two steps discuss machine learning techniques for unsupervised clustering of patients based on their inherent molecular similarities and feature selection to identify predictive biomarkers. For complete details on the use and execution of this protocol, please refer to Wang et al. 1 • Integrate and analyze multi-omics data • Statistical analysis of sequential data to identify diagnostic biomarkers • Identify inherent molecular similarities in study groups using unsupervised clustering • Employ linear classifier and feature selection to detect predictive biomarkers Publisher’s note: Undertaking any experimental protocol requires adherence to local institutional guidelines for laboratory safety and ethics. Here, we present a workflow for analyzing multi-omics data of plasma samples in patients with post-COVID condition (PCC). Applicable to various diseases, we outline steps for data preprocessing and integrating diverse assay datasets. Then, we detail statistical analysis to unveil plasma profile changes and identify biomarker-clinical variable associations. The last two steps discuss machine learning techniques for unsupervised clustering of patients based on their inherent molecular similarities and feature selection to identify predictive biomarkers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".