MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404977641 · doi:10.62617/mcb536

Serum miRNA Detection-based Alzheimer’s disease prediction regression model

2024· article· en· W4404977641 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shulian Liu, Yanhong Li, Yujing Zhang, Yaming Guo, Jingliang Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular & cellular biomechanics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicroRNA in disease regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomarkerDiseaseMedical diagnosisMini–Mental State ExaminationMedicineInternal medicineDementiaAlzheimer's diseaseOncologyLinear regressionPsychologyPathologyMachine learningBiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the deepening of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) research, serum miRNA has attracted widespread attention as a potential biomarker. Traditional diagnostic methods for AD have certain limitations, such as reliance on clinical symptoms and neuroimaging examinations, which lack sensitivity (Sen) and specificity (Spe) for early diagnosis. Therefore, this article aimed to explore the expression levels of serum miRNA in AD patients and its clinical significance, to construct an AD prediction regression model based on serum miRNA detection. This article found no statistical differences in gender, underlying diseases, age, triglycerides (TG), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) between the control group (healthy individuals) and the AD group, but obvious distinctions were observed in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive part (ADAS-cog), and Activities of Daily Living (ADL) scores. Further analysis revealed obvious distinctions in miR-31, miR-93, miR-124-3p, miR-143, miR-146a, and miR-218-5p between the two groups, with miR-124-3p showing the best diagnostic effect, followed by miR-218-5p. Based on these findings, this article constructed an AD prediction regression model, and the experimental results indicated that the model has high Sen, Spe, and accuracy (Acc) in the early diagnosis of AD, reducing the error rate of subsequent diagnoses and providing new ideas and methods for the early diagnosis of AD.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular & cellular biomechanicsSame topicMicroRNA in disease regulationFrench-language works237,207