MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Role of genetic testing in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia

2009· article· en· W2004555813 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Genetics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
FundersInstituto de Salud Carlos IIISociedad Española de CardiologíaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsArrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasiaGenetic testingCardiomyopathyDysplasiaMedicinePhenotypeDiseaseGenetic counselingGeneticsMutationInternal medicineCardiologyBiologyHeart failureGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Barahona‐Dussault C, Benito B, Campuzano O, Iglesias A, Leung TL, Robb L, Talajic M, Brugada R. Role of genetic testing in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia. In a cohort of patients with confirmed or suspected arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia (ARVC/D), genetic testing is useful in confirming the diagnosis, particularly in individuals who do not completely fulfil Task Force criteria for the disease, thereby also enabling the adoption of preventive measures in family members. Due to the high percentage of novel mutations that are expected to be identified in ARVC/D, the use of genetic screening technology based on the identification of known mutations seems to have very restricted value. Our results support that the presence of certain genetic variations could play a role in the final phenotype of patients with ARVC/D, where single and compound mutation carriers would have more symptomatic forms of the disease and the polymorphism P366L could be associated to a more benign phenotype.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.834

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.285 · 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