Analysis of KLFtranscription factor family gene variants in type 2 diabetes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Krüppel-like factor (KLF) family consists of transcription factors that can activate or repress different genes implicated in processes such as differentiation, development, and cell cycle progression. Moreover, several of these proteins have been implicated in glucose homeostasis, making them candidate genes for involvement in type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: Variants of nine KLF genes were genotyped in T2D cases and controls and analysed in a two-stage study. The first case-control set included 365 T2D patients with a strong family history of T2D and 363 normoglycemic individuals and the second set, 750 T2D patients and 741 normoglycemic individuals, all of French origin. The SNPs of six KLF genes were genotyped by Taqman SNP Genotyping Assays. The other three KLF genes (KLF2, -15 and -16) were screened and the identified frequent variants of these genes were analysed in the case-control studies. RESULTS: Three of the 28 SNPs showed a trend to be associated with T2D in our first case-control set (P < 0.10). These SNPs, located in the KLF2, KLF4 and KLF5 gene were then analysed in our second replication set, but analysis of this set and the combined analysis of the three variants in all 2,219 individuals did not show an association with T2D in this French population. As the KLF2, -15 and -16 variants were representative for the genetic variability in these genes, we conclude they do not contribute to genetic susceptibility for T2D. CONCLUSION: It is unlikely that variants in different members of the KLF gene family play a major role in T2D in the French population.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it