MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009683647 · doi:10.1136/bcr.08.2008.0688

Complete deletion of the aprataxin gene: ataxia with oculomotor apraxia type 1 with severe phenotype and cognitive deficit

2009· article· en· W2009683647 on OpenAlexaff
Grace Yoon, Robyn Westmacott, Lynn J. MacMillan, Nada Quercia, Pantelitsa Koutsou, Anthi Georghiou, Kyproula Christodoulou, Brenda Banwell

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Case Reports · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtaxiaDysarthriaApraxiaPhenotypeGait AtaxiaCognitionPsychologyMedicineNeuroscienceGeneAudiologyGeneticsBiologyAphasia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ataxia with oculomotor apraxia type 1 (AOA1) is a recently described autosomal-recessive neurodegenerative condition of childhood onset. It is caused by mutations in the APTX gene, which encodes the protein aprataxin. Clinical features include gait and limb ataxia, dysarthria, oculomotor apraxia, mild peripheral neuropathy and progression of neurological deficits.1 Some patients manifest parkinsonian symptoms or mental retardation, although the latter has been reported predominantly in Japanese patients.2 We report a patient with homozygous deletion of APTX, who presented with behavioural changes (social withdrawal), and subsequent rapid progression of neurological symptoms associated with severe cognitive decline. We suggest that complete deletion of APTX is associated with a more severe phenotype than that associated with point mutations.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Case ReportsSame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207