Bibliographic record
Abstract
Holt-Oram syndrome, first described in 1960, is one of many heart-hand syndromes. Upper limb involvement, predominantly radial, is universal, bilateral and asymmetrical, with variable severity. Cardiac defects occur in 95% of familial cases. Inheritance is autosomal dominant with 100% penetrance and no evidence of reduced fitness. Mutations in TBX5 have been reported in Holt-Oram syndrome. This study was conducted to establish whether a particular facial appearance is associated with Holt-Oram syndrome, one which might facilitate early diagnosis and aid differentiation from other heart-hand syndromes. Twenty-five individuals were evaluated, age 11 months to 70 years. A complete dysmorphological examination was carried out, serial photographs were reviewed, and a series of anthropometric craniofacial measurements was obtained. Subjectively, the face is square with a broad lower jaw and parietal bossing. The forehead is prominent and tall. There is narrowing at the temples. Eyes seem close-set. The nose appears relatively long, with a wide base, and short columella. With age the face becomes longer and more oval. Our anthropometric approach confirms certain clinical impressions. However, there is no objective evidence for increased face or nose height, two of the most striking features of the "gestalt." Nasal height is, in fact, reduced at all ages. There does not appear to be a syndrome-specific pattern profile to facilitate the discrimination of this condition from other heart-hand syndromes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".