MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973017744 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.30191

Paternal transmission of fragile X syndrome

2004· article· en· W1973017744 on OpenAlexaff
Susan Zeesman, Lonnie Zwaigenbaum, Donald T. Whelan, Randi J. Hagerman, Flora Tassone, Sherryl A. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health SciencesHamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsAlleleFragile X syndromeGeneticsDaughterMutationBiologySpermFMR1Peripheral bloodGeneImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a family in which a fragile X mosaic male, who carries both premutation and full mutation alleles in his peripheral blood leukocytes, has a daughter with both premutation and partially methylated full mutation alleles and a significant developmental disability. To our knowledge, this is the first report of such an occurrence and it challenges current thinking about the expansion and transmission of unstable FMR1 alleles from men to their daughters. It is currently accepted that neither males with premutations nor full mutations are at risk for having daughters with full mutations and fragile X syndrome. The sperm cells of full mutation males are thought to carry only premutation alleles. These alleles, when transmitted through a male, regardless of his cognitive status, are thought to be unable to expand to full mutations in the next generation. In effect, the expansion from premutation to full mutation has only been observed through female meioses. The sperm cells in the father in this family have been shown to contain only alleles in the premutation range. Since his daughter has both premutation and full mutation alleles the expansion to full mutation in this case must have occurred postzygotically.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations81
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part ASame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207