MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401565880 · doi:10.1186/s13148-024-01721-y

Combining human tissue and iPSC-derived cardiomyocyte eQTL datasets to understand noncoding genetic variants: boosting the cardiogenetics toolbox

2024· letter· en· W4401565880 on OpenAlexafffund
Saif Dababneh, Kyoung-Han Kim, Glen F. Tibbits

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Epigenetics · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of OttawaBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of OntarioHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsHuman geneticsBoosting (machine learning)ToolboxComputational biologyExpression quantitative trait lociBiologyBioinformaticsGeneticsMachine learningGeneSingle-nucleotide polymorphismComputer scienceGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advancements in next-generation sequencing and genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have revealed hundreds of loci associated with various cardiovascular diseases, highlighting the important role genetic variants play in disease pathogenesis and identifying potential therapeutics. Notably, most GWAS variants are located in noncoding genomic regions, which do not directly affect protein function. Instead, these variants are often found in genomic regions containing regulatory elements, such as promoters, enhancers, and silencers. Consequently, they regulate gene expression levels and the cell-type specificity of transcripts via modulation of transcription factor binding and chromatin accessibility [ 1 ]. Unlike variants in coding regions, where the pathogenic effect of the variant could be predicted by changes in amino acid sequence, understanding the impact of noncoding variants requires comprehensive transcriptomic and epigenomic investigations, rendering the process more challenging and costly. Additionally, the pathogenicity of noncoding variants is more difficult to interpret clinically due to our limited understanding and the scarcity of noncoding variant risk prediction tools.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0150.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueClinical EpigeneticsSame topicBioinformatics and Genomic NetworksFrench-language works237,207