MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Association of MAO A polymorphism and alcoholism in Brazilian females

2005· article· en· W2043479151 on OpenAlexaff
Camila Guindalini, Sandra Scivoletto, Ricardo de Godoi Mattos Ferreira, Agnes L. Nishimura, Monica L. Zilberman, MarcoAur lio M. Peluso, Mayana Zatz

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric Genetics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryFoothills Medical Centre
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsMonoamine oxidase AMonoamine oxidaseAllelePolymorphism (computer science)GenotypeEtiologyInternal medicineAlcohol dependenceMedicineGeneticsAlcoholGeneBiologyEndocrinologyBiochemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among the different possible genes involved in the alcoholism etiology, the X-linked monoamine oxidase A gene is a good candidate. The aim of this study was to assess whether a functional VNTR polymorphism in the promoter region of the monoamine oxidase A gene is associated with alcoholism, comparing patients of both sexes. Ninety-three alcohol-dependent patients (51 males, 42 females) and 93 sex-matched normal controls were engaged. In the total sample, the genotype containing at least one three-repeat allele was significantly more frequent among alcohol-dependent patients than controls (P=0.01). However, when the two sexes were analyzed separately, the difference was statistically significant only for females. This is of particular interest as rates of alcoholism in Brazil are markedly lower in females. Our results suggest that this monoamine oxidase A polymorphism could play a role in susceptibility to alcoholism, which may differ across sexes.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric GeneticsSame topicNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorFrench-language works237,207