MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989389375 · doi:10.1017/s1462399411001980

Insights into the genetics of osteoporosis from recent genome-wide association studies

2011· review· en· W1989389375 on OpenAlexafffund
Hou‐Feng Zheng, Timothy D. Spector, J. Brent Richards

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Reviews in Molecular Medicine · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBone Metabolism and Diseases
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGenome-wide association studyGenetic associationOsteoporosisHeritabilityMissing heritability problemGeneticsBiologyLinkage (software)Candidate geneLinkage disequilibriumComputational biologyGeneBioinformaticsGenetic variantsGenotypeSingle-nucleotide polymorphismEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Osteoporosis, which is characterised by reduced bone mineral density (BMD) and an increased risk of fragility fractures, is the result of a complex interaction between environmental factors and genetic variants that confer susceptibility. Heritability studies have shown that BMD and other osteoporosis-related traits such as ultrasound properties of bone, skeletal geometry and bone turnover have significant inheritable components. Although previous linkage and candidate gene studies have provided few replicated loci for osteoporosis, genome-wide association approaches have produced clear and reproducible findings. To date, 20 genome-wide association studies (GWASs) for osteoporosis and related traits have been conducted, identifying dozens of genes. Further meta-analyses of GWAS data and deep resequencing of rare variants will uncover more novel susceptibility loci and ultimately provide possible therapeutic targets for fracture prevention.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.298 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations39
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Reviews in Molecular MedicineSame topicBone Metabolism and DiseasesFrench-language works237,207