MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974757039 · doi:10.1055/s-0030-1249630

Normal Cognitive Functions in Joubert Syndrome

2009· article· en· W1974757039 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Andrea Poretti, Fabienne Dietrich Alber, Francesco Brancati, Bruno Dallapiccola, Enza Maria Valente, Eugen Boltshauser

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropediatrics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and Kidney Cyst Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMinistero della Salute
KeywordsJoubert syndromeCognitionAtaxiaIntelligence quotientMedicineApraxiaNeuroimagingAudiologyPediatricsPsychologyNeurosciencePsychiatryGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developmental delay and subsequent impaired cognitive functions are present in almost all patients with Joubert syndrome (JS). We report on a 20-year-old woman with mild clinical signs of JS (minimal truncal ataxia and oculomotor apraxia) but typical molar tooth sign on neuroimaging, normal full scale (IQ=93), verbal (IQ=93), and performance intelligence quotient (IQ=94). Only minor difficulties in visual-spatial organization and in some executive functions could be detected. This pattern of deficits is partly reminiscent of the cerebellar cognitive affective syndrome. Her diagnosis was only reached following the diagnosis of JS in two brothers with severe cognitive impairment. Molecular investigations demonstrated a homozygous mutation in the INPP5E gene. This exceptional observation confirms that normal cognitive functions are possible in JS and corroborates the well known intrafamilial variability.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations37
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropediatricsSame topicGenetic and Kidney Cyst DiseasesFrench-language works237,207