Preterm Birth Genome Project (PGP) – validation of resources for preterm birth genome-wide studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We determined a series of quality control (QC) analyses to assess the usability of DNA collected and processed from different countries utilizing different DNA extraction techniques prior to genome-wide association studies (GWAS). The quality of DNA collected utilizing four different DNA extraction techniques and the impact of shipping DNA at different temperatures on array performance were evaluated. Fifteen maternal-fetal pairs were used from four countries. DNA was extracted using four approaches: whole blood, blood spots with whole genome amplification (WGA), saliva and buccal swab. Samples were sent to a genotyping facility, either on dry ice or at room temperature and genotyped using Affymetrix SNP array 6.0. QC measured included extraction techniques, effect of shipping temperatures, accuracy and Mendelian concordance. Significantly fewer (50 % ) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) passed QC metrics for buccal swab DNA (P < 0.0001) due to missing genotype data (P < 0.0001). Whole blood or saliva DNA had the highest call rates (99.2 0.4 % and 99.3 0.2 % , respectively) and Mendelian concordance. Shipment temperature had no effect. DNA from blood or saliva had the highest call rate accuracy, and buccal swabs had the lowest. DNA extracted from blood, saliva and blood spots were found suitable for GWAS in our study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".