Using machine learning to predict the consumption of a Mediterranean diet with untargeted metabolomics data from controlled feeding studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Developing metabolomic signatures of diets is a promising strategy to better understand the diet-health paradigm. Our objective was to develop and validate machine learning (ML) models that predict the consumption of a Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) versus a control diet using untargeted metabolomics data from controlled feeding studies. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the Development set, 26 participants (100 % men) aged 24-62 years consumed a North American diet for 5 weeks followed by a MedDiet for 5 weeks in full-feeding conditions. In the Validation set, 70 participants (54 % men) aged 25-50 years were instructed to follow Canada's Food Guide recommendations for 4 weeks and then consumed a MedDiet for 4 weeks in full-feeding conditions. Plasma metabolites were analyzed using a MPLEx method and an untargeted metabolomics approach. Random forest (RF) and decision tree (DT) models were developed to predict diet assignment using data from the Development set and validated using data from the Validation set. The RF model from the Development set predicted diet assignment with an accuracy of 0.97 (95 %CI: 0.81-1.00). When applied to the Validation set, the RF model had an accuracy of 0.79 (95 %CI:0.71-0.86). Similar results were obtained using the DT model. CONCLUSION: RF and DT models can predict the consumption of a MedDiet diet with high accuracy in full-feeding conditions in males based on plasma untargeted metabolomics data. However, accuracy is reduced when models are applied to a more heterogenous sample (sample of males and females and less controlled feeding conditions).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".