MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979816193 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.36251

Solving the puzzle of spinal muscular atrophy: What are the missing pieces?

2013· review· en· W1979816193 on OpenAlexaff
Francesco Danilo Tiziano, Judith Melki, Louise R. Simard

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurogenetic and Muscular Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSMN1SMA*Spinal muscular atrophyExonMotor neuronGeneticsGeneBiologyDiseaseMutationNeuroscienceBioinformaticsMedicinePathologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is an autosomal recessive, lower motor neuron disease. Clinical heterogeneity is pervasive: three infantile (type I-III) and one adult-onset (type IV) forms are recognized. Type I SMA is the most common genetic cause of death in infancy and accounts for about 50% of all patients with SMA. Most forms of SMA are caused by mutations of the survival motor neuron (SMN1) gene. A second gene that is 99% identical to SMN1 (SMN2) is located in the same region. The only functionally relevant difference between the two genes identified to date is a C → T transition in exon 7 of SMN2, which determines an alternative spliced isoform that predominantly excludes exon 7. Thus, SMN2 genes do not produce sufficient full length SMN protein to prevent the onset of the disease. Since the identification of the causative mutation, biomedical research of SMA has progressed by leaps and bounds: from clues on the function of SMN protein, to the development of different models of the disease, to the identification of potential treatments, some of which are currently in human trials. The aim of this review is to elucidate the current state of knowledge, emphasizing how close we are to the solution of the puzzle that is SMA, and, more importantly, to highlight the missing pieces of this puzzle. Filling in these gaps in our knowledge will likely accelerate the development and delivery of efficient treatments for SMA patients and be a prerequisite towards achieving our final goal, the cure of SMA.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part ASame topicNeurogenetic and Muscular Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207