MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1827682923 · doi:10.1111/trf.13357

Identification of six new <i>RHCE</i> variant alleles in individuals of diverse racial origin

2015· article· en· W1827682923 on OpenAlexaff
Mindy Goldman, Arantxa Cemborain, Jacqueline Cote, Rachid El Hamss, Robert L. Flower, Adirane Garaizar, F. García‐Sánchez, Catherine A. Hyland, Monica Kalvelage, Donatella Londero, Genghis H. Lopez, Nicoletta Revelli, Pablo Rodríguez‐Wilhelmi, Antonietta Villa, Gorka Ochoa‐Garay

Bibliographic record

VenueTransfusion · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood groups and transfusion
Canadian institutionsCanadian Blood Services
FundersAustralian Red Cross Lifeblood
KeywordsGenotypingAlleleGeneticsBiologyTypingGenotypePolymerase chain reactionGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The introduction of molecular methods into routine blood typing is prompting the identification of new blood group alleles. Discrepancies between the results of genotyping and serology or chance events uncovered during genotyping prompted additional investigations, which revealed six new RHCE variant alleles. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Samples from eight blood donors, two patients (one prenatal), and a patient's relative, all of diverse racial origin, were analyzed by standard serology methods, targeted genotyping arrays, DNA sequencing, and allele-specific polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: Six new RHCE alleles were identified, namely, RHCE*cE84A, RHCE*ce202G, RHCE*ce307T, RHCE*Ce377G, RHCE*ce697G,712G,733G,744C, and RHCE*Ce733G. CONCLUSION: While implementation of new assays in commercial genotyping platforms to detect the polymorphisms reported here may not be justified given their apparent rarity, software interpretative algorithms may benefit from the identification of new alleles for a more accurate determination of genotypes and prediction of phenotypes.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransfusionSame topicBlood groups and transfusionFrench-language works237,207