MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400190069 · doi:10.1080/19490976.2024.2360233

The gut microbiome in disorders of gut–brain interaction

2024· review· en· W4400190069 on OpenAlexafffund
Narjis Kraïmi, Taylor Ross, Julien Pujo, Giada De Palma

Bibliographic record

VenueGut Microbes · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGut microbiomeMicrobiomeGut–brain axisGut floraBiologyIrritable bowel syndromeBioinformaticsPathogenesisNeuroscienceImmunologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs), chronic disorders characterized by either abdominal pain, altered intestinal motility, or their combination, have a worldwide prevalence of more than 40% and impose a high socioeconomic burden with a significant decline in quality of life. Recently, FGIDs have been reclassified as disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI), reflecting the key role of the gut-brain bidirectional communication in these disorders and their impact on psychological comorbidities. Although, during the past decades, the field of DGBIs has advanced significantly, the molecular mechanisms underlying DGBIs pathogenesis and pathophysiology, and the role of the gut microbiome in these processes are not fully understood. This review aims to discuss the latest body of literature on the complex microbiota-gut-brain interactions and their implications in the pathogenesis of DGBIs. A better understanding of the existing communication pathways between the gut microbiome and the brain holds promise in developing effective therapeutic interventions for DGBIs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations59
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGut MicrobesSame topicGastrointestinal motility and disordersFrench-language works237,207