MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053216150 · doi:10.1159/000132361

Re-evaluation of the sublocalization of esterase D and its relation to the retinoblastoma locus by in situ hybridization

2008· article· en· W2053216150 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandra M.V. Duncan, Clive P. Morgan, Brenda L. Gallie, Robert A. Phillips, Jeremy A. Squire

Bibliographic record

VenueCytogenetics and Cell Genetics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyLocus (genetics)In situ hybridizationEsteraseGeneticsIn situRetinoblastomaEvolutionary biologyMolecular biologyGeneEnzymeBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In situ hybridization of a cDNA probe for the esterase D gene (ESD) was carried out on human chromosomes. The probe hybridized most strongly to 13q14.2 and 13q14.3. This observation raises doubts concerning the most recently published assignment of ESD to 13q14.1. A deletion in an individual with retinoblastoma was reported to separate the closely linked ESD and retinoblastoma (RB1) loci, placing ESD proximal to RB1. Quantitative in situ hybridization studies of this deletion do not confirm this interpretation. Rather, they suggest that ESD is missing from the deleted chromosome 13 and duplicated on the normal homolog. From these findings, we conclude that the deletion in this individual cannot be used to determine the orientation nor the sublocalization of ESD and RB1 within the 13q14 region.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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

Citations27
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCytogenetics and Cell GeneticsSame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207