MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Increased genetic risk or protection for canine autoimmune lymphocytic thyroiditis in Giant Schnauzers depends on DLA class II genotype

2010· article· en· W1970925731 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria Wilbe, Katarina Sundberg, I. R. Hansen, E. Strandberg, R. F. Nachreiner, Åke Hedhammar, L. J. Kennedy, Göran Andersson, Susanne Björnerfeldt

Bibliographic record

VenueTissue Antigens · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicdental development and anomalies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSvenska Forskningsrådet Formas
KeywordsGenotypeImmunologyThyroiditisMedicineBiologyGeneticsThyroidGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dogs represent an excellent comparative model for autoimmune thyroiditis as several dog breeds develop canine lymphocytic thyroiditis (CLT), which is clinically similar to Hashimoto's thyroiditis in human. We obtained evidence that dog leukocyte antigen (DLA) class II genotype function as either genetic risk factor that predisposes for CLT or as protective factor against the disease. Genetic diversity at their DLA-DRB1, -DQA1, and -DQB1 loci were defined and potential association to major histocompatibility complex II haplotypes and alleles was analyzed. Giant Schnauzers carrying the DLA-DRB1*01201/DQA1*00101/DQB1*00201 haplotype showed an increased risk (odds ratio of 6.5) for developing CLT. The same risk haplotype has, to date, been observed in three different breeds affected by this disease, Giant Schnauzer, Dobermann, and Labrador Retriever, indicating that it is a common genetic risk factor in a variety of breeds affected by this disease. Importantly, protection for development of the disease was found in dogs carrying the DLA-DRB1*01301/DQA1*00301/DQB1*00501 haplotype (odds ratio of 0.3).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations45
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTissue AntigensSame topicdental development and anomaliesFrench-language works237,207