Survival with Rett syndrome: comparing Rett’s original sample with data from the Australian Rett Syndrome Database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: rett syndrome is a severe neurodevelopmental disorder that typically affects females. Little is known about the natural history and survival time of these females. METHOD: we compared the survival of all Austrian female participants from Rett's historical cohort (1966) with that of affected females registered in the Australian Rett Syndrome Database. The analysis included both Kaplan-Meier analysis and a log-rank test for equality of survivor functions. RESULTS: of females in the original Austrian group, three are still alive. The median age at death was 13 years 4.8 months. The probability of survival up to the age of 25 years was 21%, compared with 71% in the Australian cohort (p<0.001). We found no practical or statistically significant differences in survival between the various birth year groups within the Australian cohort. INTERPRETATION: our data indicate that survival of females with Rett syndrome has improved since the late 1960s but that there has been shown no change in survival over the last 30 years, possibly because the follow-up time has been too short.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".