Research Tracker›Biomarker Atlas›Marker Pages›Oxidative phosphorylation efficiency

Oxidative phosphorylation efficiency: biomarker evidence

Oxidative phosphorylation efficiency appears in 1 entry of the OSMF biomarker atlas, covering ME/CFS. Across those entries it is reduced in 1. It is currently reported in a single condition in this atlas; cross-condition comparison will be added as the dataset grows. Each row below links to a page with the comparison group, associated symptoms, test details and primary citation.

ME/CFS

Where Oxidative phosphorylation efficiency is reported

Also listed as: OXPHOS

ConditionDirectionCompared againstAssociated symptomsSource
ME/CFS↓ reducedhealthy controlsFatigue, reduced exercise capacityHolden et al. 2020

Frequently asked questions

In which conditions is Oxidative phosphorylation efficiency altered?

In the OSMF atlas Oxidative phosphorylation efficiency is reported in ME/CFS. It is reduced in 1 across 1 entries.

Is there a standard clinical test for Oxidative phosphorylation efficiency?

The atlas entries for Oxidative phosphorylation efficiency do not carry a LOINC code, which usually means the marker was measured with research assays or study-specific methods rather than a routine clinical panel.

Is one abnormal Oxidative phosphorylation efficiency result diagnostic?

No single biomarker result is diagnostic of any of these conditions. Findings reflect group averages from published cohorts with substantial overlap between patients and controls.

Cite this page

Open Source Medicine Foundation. (2026). Oxidative phosphorylation efficiency across conditions: biomarker evidence. OSMF Research Tracker. Retrieved October 7, 2026, from https://research.opensourcemed.info/biomarkers/markers/oxidative-phosphorylation-efficiency.html
Get OSMF research updates. New biomarker, trial and treatment evidence summaries by email.
Subscribe on Substack

Last reviewed: 2026-06-29 · Browse: Biomarker Index · All marker pages · Biomarker Atlas

Disclaimer: Educational synthesis of peer-reviewed research; not medical advice. Findings are group-level and vary with study design. Discuss any result with a qualified clinician.