MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Update on chromosomal locations for psychiatric disorders: Report of the interim meeting of chromosome workshop chairpersons from the VIIth World Congress of Psychiatric Genetics, Monterey, California, October 14-18, 1999

2000· article· en· W2052713474 on OpenAlexaff
Lynn E. DeLisi, Nick Craddock, Sevilla D. Detera‐Wadleigh, Tatiana Foroud, Pablo V. Gejman, James L. Kennedy, Corinne Lendon, Fabìo Macciardi, Patrick O. McKeon, L. Mynett‐Johnson, John I. Nürnberger, Andrew D. Paterson, Sybille Schwab, Christine Van Broeckhoven, Dieter B. Wildenauer, Timothy J. Crow

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsInterimLibrary scienceSection (typography)PsychiatryGerontologyMedicinePsychologyHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Chromosome Workshops at the annual World Congress of Psychiatric Genetics have proven to be useful tools to compare data and to assess the significance of results from independent studies. These sessions have also been able to integrate the findings across diagnostic groups. These workshops will continue to extend the previously reported information to include new data sets at future meetings. The integrative maps and consensus reports will be available in regular publications and on the World-Wide WEB. No gene has yet been isolated for the major psychiatric disorders-schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, alcoholism, or autism. The use of linkage strategies alone to localize genes for these complex disorders remains to be established and alternative approaches should continue to be explored.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations40
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical GeneticsSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207