MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400337054 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2024.110447

A cross-cohort analysis of dental plaque microbiome in early childhood caries

2024· article· en· W4400337054 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohd Wasif Khan, Daryl L. X. Fung, Robert J. Schroth, Prashen Chelikani, Pingzhao Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsOral MicrobiomeDental plaqueMicrobiomeDentistryCohortMedicineCohort studyBiologyBioinformaticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early childhood caries (ECC) is a multifactorial disease with a microbiome playing a significant role in caries progression. Understanding changes at the microbiome level in ECC is required to develop diagnostic and preventive strategies. In our study, we combined data from small independent cohorts to compare microbiome composition using a unified pipeline and applied a batch correction to avoid the pitfalls of batch effects. Our meta-analysis identified common biomarker species between different studies. We identified the best machine learning method for the classification of ECC versus caries-free samples and compared the performance of this method using a leave-one-dataset-out approach. Our random forest model was found to be generalizable when used in combination with other studies. While our results highlight the potential microbial species involved in ECC and disease classification, we also mentioned the limitations that can serve as a guide for future researchers to design and use appropriate tools for such analyses.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicOral microbiology and periodontitis researchFrench-language works237,207