MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abnormal retinal thickening is a common feature among patients with ARSACS-related phenotypes: Table 1

2014· letter· en· W2058952576 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrick Yu‐Wai‐Man, Angela Pyle, Helen Griffin, Mauro Santibanez-Korev, Rita Horváth, Patrick F. Chinnery

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Ophthalmology · 2014
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineHereditary spastic paraplegiaCerebellar ataxiaAtaxiaPopulationSpasticityPhenotypePediatricsGeneticsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autosomal-recessive spastic ataxia of Charlevoix-Saguenay (ARSACS) was first described among French Canadian patients from Quebec presenting with a stereotypical triad of early-onset cerebellar ataxia, spastic paraplegia and peripheral neuropathy. Two recurring pathogenic mutations in the SACS gene were subsequently identified in these families in keeping with a mutational founder event in a geographically isolated population.1 However, ARSACS is being increasingly recognised worldwide as an important cause of inherited ataxia.2 Interestingly, non-Quebec patients can show strikingly variable features marked by a lack of spasticity, cognitive impairment and a delayed age of onset.2 Given the heterogeneous clinical picture that can be associated with SACS mutations, the identification of ancillary features linked with these genetic defects could prove particularly useful in prioritising the most appropriate lines of investigations when confronted with a suspected case of ARSACS. Although prominent retinal hypermyelination is thought to be a characteristic manifestation of classical ARSACS among Quebec patients, this ophthalmological finding has only been described infrequently in patients from Europe, Asia and the Middle East.2 A recent case report has even further argued that retinal ‘hypermyelination’ in ARSACS is a pathologically misleading term that should be …

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.759
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.223 · 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.

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

Citations27
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of OphthalmologySame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207