MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014903264 · doi:10.1016/j.febslet.2013.12.022

Syndromic and non‐syndromic disease‐linked Cx43 mutations

2014· review· en· W2014903264 on OpenAlexafffund
Dale W. Laird

Bibliographic record

VenueFEBS Letters · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicConnexins and lens biology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsConnexinPhenotypeDiseaseCraniofacialGeneGeneticsBiologyTooth diseaseMutationBioinformaticsMedicinePathologyGap junction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are now at least 14 distinct diseases linked to germ line mutations in the 21 genes that encode the connexin (Cx) family of gap junction proteins. This review focuses on the links between germ-line mutations in the gene encoding Cx43 (GJA1) and the human disease termed oculodentodigital dysplasia (ODDD). This disease is clinically characterized by soft tissue fusion of the digits, abnormal craniofacial bone development, small eyes and loss of tooth enamel. However, the disease is considerably more complex and somewhat degenerative as patients often suffer from other syndromic effects that include incontinence, glaucoma, skin diseases and neuropathies that become more pronounced during aging. The challenge continues to be understanding how distinct Cx43 gene mutations cause such a diverse range of tissue phenotypes and pathophysiological changes while other Cx43-rich organs are relatively unaffected. This review will provide an overview of many of these studies and distill some themes and outstanding questions that need to be addressed in the coming years.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 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

Citations129
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEBS LettersSame topicConnexins and lens biologyFrench-language works237,207