MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417148474 · doi:10.1186/s13099-025-00784-3

Gut microbiota and intestinal polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on 16S rRNA gene sequencing

2025· review· en· W4417148474 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGut Pathogens · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGut floraParasitology16S ribosomal RNAMedical microbiologyRibosomal RNADNA sequencingPersonalized medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Colorectal polyps serve as precursors to colorectal cancer and pose a growing public health challenge with their increasing incidence. The potential role of gut microbiota (GM) dysbiosis in colorectal polyp pathogenesis has garnered attention, yet existing evidence remains inconsistent. This study aimed to compare gut microbiota differences between colorectal polyp patients and healthy controls using systematic review and meta-analysis using 16S rRNA sequencing data. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic search was performed across multiple databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library) up to April 2025. Only studies comparing gut microbiota profiles between colorectal polyp patients and healthy controls were included. Data was independently screened and extracted by two reviewers, and study quality was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses were conducted with R (version 4.4.1) and Stata (version 18.0), with heterogeneity assessed via the I 2 statistic and publication bias through funnel plots, Egger’s test, Begg’s test, and sensitivity analyses.Logit transformation was applied to enhance the accuracy and reproducibility of the analysis. Additionally, KEGG pathway data was utilized to explore the distinct metabolic pathway patterns between polyp patients and healthy controls. Systematic review and meta-analysis were performed by synthesizing 11 independent 16S rRNA-sequenced studies. Our analysis revealed that patients with colorectal polyps exhibited significantly reduced GM diversity, decreased Firmicutes abundance, and increased Fusobacteria abundance. KEGG pathway analysis indicated enrichment of the TCA cycle in polyp patients and more active amino acid metabolism in healthy controls. Patients with colorectal polyps have distinct gut microbiota characteristics and specific metabolic shifts. These findings may facilitate the discovery of non-invasive biomarkers, guide personalized prevention strategies, and improve risk stratification for early intervention.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.278 · 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