Artificial intelligence applied to ‘omics data in liver disease: towards a personalised approach for diagnosis, prognosis and treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advancements in omics technologies and artificial intelligence (AI) methodologies are fuelling our progress towards personalised diagnosis, prognosis and treatment strategies in hepatology. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the current landscape of AI methods used for analysis of omics data in liver diseases. We present an overview of the prevalence of different omics levels across various liver diseases, as well as categorise the AI methodology used across the studies. Specifically, we highlight the predominance of transcriptomic and genomic profiling and the relatively sparse exploration of other levels such as the proteome and methylome, which represent untapped potential for novel insights. Publicly available database initiatives such as The Cancer Genome Atlas and The International Cancer Genome Consortium have paved the way for advancements in the diagnosis and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. However, the same availability of large omics datasets remains limited for other liver diseases. Furthermore, the application of sophisticated AI methods to handle the complexities of multiomics datasets requires substantial data to train and validate the models and faces challenges in achieving bias-free results with clinical utility. Strategies to address the paucity of data and capitalise on opportunities are discussed. Given the substantial global burden of chronic liver diseases, it is imperative that multicentre collaborations be established to generate large-scale omics data for early disease recognition and intervention. Exploring advanced AI methods is also necessary to maximise the potential of these datasets and improve early detection and personalised treatment strategies.
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 | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".