MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999958840 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.10341

Estimation of genetic risk for type 1 diabetes

2002· review· en· W1999958840 on OpenAlexaff
Jorma Ilonen, Minna Sjöroos, Mikael Knip, Riitta Veijola, Olli Simell, Hans K. Åkerblom, Peristera Paschou, Evangelos Bozas, Beatrice Havarani, Ariadne Malamitsi‐Puchner, Joanna Thymelli, Andriani Vazeou, Christos S. Bartsocas

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiabetes and associated disorders
Canadian institutionsJuvenile Diabetes Research Foundation
FundersNational and Kapodistrian University of AthensAcademy of Finland
KeywordsHuman leukocyte antigenGeneticsAlleleGenotypeTypingBiologyLinkage disequilibriumLocus (genetics)HaplotypePopulationAllele frequencyGeneMedicineEnvironmental healthAntigen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The most important gene loci defining risk of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) are located within the HLA gene region. HLA-DQ molecules are of primary importance but HLA-DR gene products modify the risk conferred by HLA-DQ. The risk associated with an HLA genotype is defined by the particular combination of susceptible and protective alleles. The highest risk is associated with a combination of two different risk haplotypes (7% risk to develop T1DM in Finland) whereas protective genotypes covering 69% of population have a risk of less than 0.2%). The complicated analysis of HLA genotypes is simplified by strong linkage disequilibrium between HLA-DRB1, -DQA1 and -DQB1 loci. In many cases one can deduce the alleles of other loci based on determination of the alleles in one locus. Differences between various populations in the frequency of marker alleles and in the linkages between them has to be taken into account. We have developed PCR based typing methods that utilize blood spot samples, microtiter plate format and lanthanide labeled oligonucleotide probes to define HLA-DQ and -DR alleles relevant for T1DM risk. Typing is run stepwise so that after initial HLA-DQB1 typing only those samples will be further analyzed in which -DQA1 or -DRB1 typing is informative and expected to contribute to the risk estimation. This method has been used to screen more than 50,000 newborn infants in Finland over a time period of 6 years, and it has been able to identify most children who have developed T1D during the follow-up period. The efficiency of the procedure has also been tested in Finnish and Greek populations.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.300 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations79
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical GeneticsSame topicDiabetes and associated disordersFrench-language works237,207