MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042144338 · doi:10.1093/brain/awu348

Exome sequencing in undiagnosed inherited and sporadic ataxias

2014· article· en· W2042144338 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Angela Pyle, Tania Smertenko, David Bargiela, Helen Griffin, Jennifer Duff, Marie Appleton, Konstantinos Douroudis, Gerald Pfeffer, Mauro Santibanez‐Koref, Gail Eglon, Patrick Yu‐Wai‐Man, Venkateswaran Ramesh, Rita Horváth, Patrick F. Chinnery

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWellcome Trust
KeywordsExome sequencingDiseaseExomeGeneticsGenetic heterogeneityMedicineDNA sequencingGenetic testingPhenotypeMedical geneticsGenetic counselingBioinformaticsGeneBiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inherited ataxias are clinically and genetically heterogeneous, and a molecular diagnosis is not possible in most patients. Having excluded common sporadic, inherited and metabolic causes, we used an unbiased whole exome sequencing approach in 35 affected individuals, from 22 randomly selected families of white European descent. We defined the likely molecular diagnosis in 14 of 22 families (64%). This revealed de novo dominant mutations, validated disease genes previously described in isolated families, and broadened the clinical phenotype of known disease genes. The diagnostic yield was the same in both young and older-onset patients, including sporadic cases. We have demonstrated the impact of exome sequencing in a group of patients notoriously difficult to diagnose genetically. This has important implications for genetic counselling and diagnostic service provision.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations139
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207