MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1482537552 · doi:10.1159/000382046

35-Year Follow-Up of a Case of Ring Chromosome 2: Array-CGH Analysis and Literature Review of the Ring Syndrome

2015· review· en· W1482537552 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Sarri, Sofia Douzgou, Haris Kontos, Katherine K. Anagnostopoulou, Zeynep Tümer, Maria Grigoriadou, Michael B. Petersen, Haris Kokotas, Konstantina Merou, Efi Pandelia, Έλενα Γιουρούκου, Κaterina Papanikolaou, Gilbert B. Côté, Yolanda Gyftodimou

Bibliographic record

VenueCytogenetic and Genome Research · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRing chromosomeRing (chemistry)BiologyChromosomeGeneticsKaryotypeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Côté et al. [1981] suggested that ring chromosomes with or without deletions share a common pattern of phenotypic anomalies, regardless of which chromosome is involved. The phenotype of this 'general ring syndrome' consists of growth failure without malformations, few or no minor anomalies, and mild to moderate mental retardation. We reconsidered the ring chromosome 2 case previously published by Côté et al. [1981], and we characterized it by array CGH, polymorphic markers as well as subtelomere MLPA and FISH analysis. A terminal deletion (q37.3qter) of maternal origin of the long arm of the ring chromosome 2 was detected and confirmed by all the above-mentioned methods. Ring chromosome 2 cases are exceedingly rare. Only 18 cases, including the present one, have been published so far, and our patient is the longest reported survivor, with a 35-year follow-up, and the third case characterized by array-CGH analysis.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCytogenetic and Genome ResearchSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207