Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recurrent miscarriage (RM) is defined as three consecutive pregnancy failures and is estimated to affect ~1% of couples trying to conceive. The cause of RM remains unknown in approximately 50% of cases. In this study, it was hypothesized that some of the underlying factors yet to be discovered are genetic. The aim was to search for mutations in genes AMN, EPCR, TM, and p53 known to cause miscarriage in mouse models and thereby find new genetic causes for unexplained miscarriages in humans. In addition, the mitochondrial genome was studied because mitochondria are involved in processes important in early development. Furthermore, sex chromosome characteristics suggested to underlie miscarriage were also studied. \n\nA total of 40 couples and 8 women with unexplained RM were collected for this study and screened for mutations in the candidate genes. Six interesting exonic or potential splice site disrupting variations were detected. However, their phenotypic effects cannot be determined without further investigations. Additionally, an association between the C11992A polymorphism of the p53 gene and RM was detected. The results indicate that women carrying the C/A or A/A genotype have a two-fold higher risk for RM than women with a C/C genotype. This strengthens the results of previous studies reporting that p53 sequence variations may cause miscarriage. The role of variation C11992A in embryonic development is, however, difficult to predict without further studies \n\nWhen screening the mitochondrial genome a heteroplasmic mtDNA variation was found in an unexpected high number of women, as heteroplasmic variations are reported to be rare. One novel variation and 18 previously reported polymorphisms were detected in the mitochondrial genome. Although the detected variations are likely to be neutral polymorphisms, a role in the aetiology of miscarriage cannot be excluded as some mtDNA variations may be pathogenic only when a threshold is reached. \n\nRecent publications have reported skewed X chromosome inactivation and Y chromosome microdeletions to be associated with RM. Therefore, these sex chromosome abnormalities in the context of RM were investigated. No associations between skewed X chromosome inactivation or Y chromosome microdeletions and RM in the Finnish patients were detected. \n\nData on ancestral birthplaces of the patients were collected to study any possible geographic clustering, which would indicate a common predisposing factor. The results showed clustering of the birthplaces in eastern Finland in a subset of patients. This suggests a possibility of an enriched susceptibility gene which may contribute to RM.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.003 |
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".