MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multiomics: Functional Molecular Biomarkers of Micronutrients for Public Health Application

2024· review· en· W4401995303 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsay H. Allen, Michael Fenech, Marcia LeVatte, Keith P. West, David S. Wishart

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Nutrition · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicronutrientNutrigenomicsPublic healthMicronutrient deficiencyBiologyEpigenomicsEnvironmental healthBioinformaticsMedicineBiotechnologyPathologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adequate micronutrient intake and status are global public health goals. Vitamin and mineral deficiencies are widespread and known to impair health and survival across the life stages. However, knowledge of molecular effects, metabolic pathways, biological responses to variation in micronutrient nutriture, and abilities to assess populations for micronutrient deficiencies and their pathology remain lacking. Rapidly evolving methodological capabilities in genomics, epigenomics, proteomics, and metabolomics offer unparalleled opportunities for the nutrition research community to link micronutrient exposure to cellular health; discover new, arguably essential micronutrients of microbial origin; and integrate methods of molecular biology, epidemiology, and intervention trials to develop novel approaches to assess and prevent micronutrient deficiencies in populations. In this review article, we offer new terminology to specify nutritional application of multiomic approaches and encourage collaboration across the basic to public health sciences to advance micronutrient deficiency prevention.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of NutritionSame topicFolate and B Vitamins ResearchFrench-language works237,207