Meta-analysis identifies common gut microbiota associated with multiple sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have identified a diverse group of microbial taxa that differ between patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and the healthy population. However, interpreting findings on MS-associated microbiota is challenging, as there is no true consensus. It is unclear whether there is gut microbiota commonly altered in MS across studies. METHODS: To answer this, we performed a meta-analysis based on the 16S rRNA gene sequencing data from seven geographically and technically diverse studies comprising a total of 524 adult subjects (257 MS and 267 healthy controls). Analysis was conducted for each individual study after reprocessing the data and also by combining all data together. The blocked Wilcoxon rank-sum test and linear mixed-effects regression were used to identify differences in microbial composition and diversity between MS and healthy controls. Network analysis was conducted to identify bacterial correlations. A leave-one-out sensitivity analysis was performed to ensure the robustness of the findings. RESULTS: The microbiome community structure was significantly different between studies. Re-analysis of data from individual studies revealed a lower relative abundance of Prevotella in MS across studies, compared to controls. Meta-analysis found that although alpha and beta diversity did not differ between MS and controls, a higher abundance of Actinomyces and a lower abundance of Faecalibacterium were reproducibly associated with MS. Additionally, network analysis revealed that the recognized negative Bacteroides-Prevotella correlation in controls was disrupted in patients with MS. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis identified common gut microbiota associated with MS across geographically and technically diverse studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".