Journal Articles

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915

Browse

Subject: search.filters.subject.Cluster analysis

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Integrated multi-omic and symptom clustering reveals lower-gastrointestinal disorders of gut-brain interaction heterogeneity
    (Taylor and Francis Group, 2026-12-31) Dowrick JM; Roy NC; Carco C; James SC; Heenan PE; Frampton CMA; Fraser K; Young W; Cooney J; Trower T; Keenan JI; McNabb WC; Mullaney JA; Bayer SB; Talley NJ; Gearry RB; Angeli-Gordon TR
    Rome IV disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI) subtypes are known to be unstable and demonstrate high rates of non-treatment response, likely indicating patient heterogeneity. Cluster analysis, a type of unsupervised machine learning, can identify homogeneous sub-populations. Independent cluster analyses of symptom and biological data have highlighted its value in predicting patient outcomes. Integrated clustering of symptom and biological data may provide a unique multimodal perspective that better captures the complexity of DGBI. Here, integrated symptom and multi-omic cluster analysis was performed on a cohort of healthy controls and patients with lower-gastrointestinal tract DGBI. Cluster stability was assessed by considering how frequently pairs of participants appeared in the same cluster between different bootstrapped datasets. Functional enrichment analysis was performed on the biological signatures of stable DGBI-predominant clusters, implicating disrupted ammonia handling and metabolism as possible pathophysiologies present in a subset of patients with DGBI. Integrated clustering revealed subtypes that were not apparent using a singular modality, suggesting a symptom-only classification is prone to capturing heterogeneous sub-populations.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Motivators and barriers to plant-based product consumption across Aotearoa New Zealand flexitarians
    (Elsevier Ltd, 2024-08) Weerawarna N.R.P. M; Giezenaar C; Coetzee P; Godfrey AJR; Foster M; Hort J
    Limited knowledge exists concerning Aotearoa New Zealand (A-NZ) flexitarians and their respective motivators and barriers towards consumption of novel plant-based products (PBPs) heralded as aids for dietary meat reduction. This study aimed to determine if A-NZ flexitarians, who have tried novel PBPs, can be segmented based on different motivators and barriers to meat reduction and PBP consumption, if the consumer profile of the different segments varies according to identified gender, generation group, neophobia and meat and PBP consumption frequency. It also aimed to identify sensory characteristics novel PBPs need to possess to be attractive to A-NZ flexitarians and if these vary across segments. PBP-consuming flexitarians (n = 584), stratified according to age (Millennial/Gen X), identified gender and meat consumption frequency, completed an online survey regarding a) their level of agreement regarding statements related to factors driving PBP consumption and flexitarianism in general, and b) their satisfaction with the sensory experience of consuming current PBPs. ‘Tastes good’ was the top-rated factor for selecting PBPs for all consumers, but most were dissatisfied with the sensory characteristics of current PBPs. K-means cluster analysis identified three flexitarian segments based on similarities and differences in key motivations and barriers to consume PBPs. Attitudes and behaviours related to nutrition/health, and social status attained from eating both PBPs and meat products, accounted for most variation across the respondents. Overall, higher food neophobia was associated with higher PBP consumption, suggesting that neophobia itself is not necessarily a barrier to PBP consumption in A-NZ flexitarians. Improving the sensory profiles of PBPs whilst delivering nutritional requirements presented as key considerations for future product development and research. This research highlights the importance of understanding the distinct values, attitudes and behaviours of different flexitarian groups as opposed to generalised research aimed at flexitarians per se.