High incidence rate and absent family histories in one quarter of patients newly diagnosed with Huntington disease in British Columbia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The advent of the direct mutation test for Huntington disease (HD) has made it possible to identify a previously unrecognized symptomatic population of HD, including those with an atypical presentation or patients without a family history of HD. The present study investigated the uptake of this test in the province of British Columbia (BC), Canada and assessed the incidence rate and rate of identification of new mutations for HD. All symptomatic individuals residing in BC who were referred for the genetic test for HD between 1993 and 2000 (n=205) were analyzed for CAG expansion, baseline demographics and clinical data, and a family history of HD. A total of 141 (or 68.8%) had a CAG expansion > or =36. Of these, almost one-quarter (24.1%) did not have a family history of HD. An extensive chart review revealed that 11 patients (or 7.8%) had reliable information on both parents (who lived well into old age) and therefore possibly could represent new mutations for HD. This indicates a three to four times higher new mutation rate than previously reported. Our findings also show that the yearly incidence rate for HD was 6.9 per million, which is two times higher than previous incidence studies performed prior to the identification of the HD mutation. We also identified five persons with a clinical presentation of HD but without CAG expansion (genocopies) (2.4%).
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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 it