MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046632949 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.20458

Boy with 47,XXY,del(15)(q11.2q13) karyotype and Prader–Willi syndrome: A new case and review of the literature

2003· review· en· W2046632949 on OpenAlexaff
Małgorzata J.M. Nowaczyk, Susan Zeesman, April Kam, Sherryl A. Taylor, Ronald F. Carter, Donald T. Whelan

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health SciencesHamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKaryotypeGenetic counselingGeneticsChromosome analysisChromosomePhenotypeBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report on a 10-year-old boy with a 47,XXY,del(15)(q11.2q13) karyotype and a Prader-Willi syndrome phenotype. His medical history and physical examination conformed to all of the major clinical criteria for Prader-Willi syndrome, but his height was taller than expected based on his hand and foot sizes. The deleted chromosome 15 was paternal in origin and molecular analysis showed maternal origin for the additional X chromosome. These findings suggest that the presence of these two disorders was coincidental in our patient. This supports the findings in the two other 47,XXY and Prader-Willi cases for which parent of origin studies have been published. Given the information from the literature and presented herein, we suggest that genetic counseling for cases of PWS and 47,XXY should address these two conditions separately.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
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

Citations76
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part ASame topicGenetic Syndromes and ImprintingFrench-language works237,207