MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988415583 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.35568

Life‐history chronicle for a patient with the recently described chromosome 4q21 microdeletion syndrome

2012· article· en· W1988415583 on OpenAlexafffund
Erica S. Tsang, Rosemarie Rupps, Barbara McGillivray, Patrice Eydoux, Marco A. Marra, Laura Arbour, Sylvie Langlois, Jan M. Friedman, Farah Zahir

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFaculty of Medicine, University of British ColumbiaChild and Family Research Institute
KeywordsHypotoniaNatural historyMicrodeletion syndromeFamily historyIntellectual disabilityMedicinePediatricsChromosomeGeneticsBiologyGeneInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[Bonnet et al. (2010); J Med Genet 47: 377-384] recently suggested a 4q21 microdeletion syndrome with several common features, including severe intellectual disability, lack of speech, hypotonia, significant growth restriction, and distinctive facial features. Overlap of the deleted regions of 13 patients, including a patient we previously reported, delineates a critical region, with PRKG2 and RASGEF1B emerging as candidate genes. Here we provide a detailed clinical report and photographic life history of our previously reported patient. Previous case reports of this new syndrome have not described the prognosis or natural history of these patients.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part ASame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207