Bibliographic record
Abstract
Results of many studies from around the world have revealed that haemochromatosis is the most prevalent genetic disease in people of European descent. However, it continues to be regarded as an uncommon disease by many physicians and is not listed as a common cause of death. The gene for haemochromatosis was discovered in 1996 and most typical patients are homozygous for the C282Y mutation of the HFE gene.1 Studies using genetic testing have estimated the prevalence to be in the 1:188 to 1:327 range (table1).2-5 The two most likely explanations for the apparent discrepancy between prevalence studies of haemochromatosis and the clinical impression are: ( a ) the failure to consider the diagnosis and to order the appropriate diagnostic tests (underdiagnosis) and ( b ) absence of iron overload and clinical disease in patients homozygous for the haemochromatosis gene (incomplete penetrance). View this table: Table 1 Prevalence of haemochromatosis in screening studies using genotyping and phenotyping The percentage of C282Y homozygotes with iron overload as defined by an increased serum ferritin in population screening studies has ranged from 19% (blood donors) to 75% in the general population (table 1). However, an elevated serum ferritin is not synonymous with the inevitable progression of the disease to cirrhosis, diabetes, heart disease, and other haemochromatosis related morbidity. In a study of patients with haemochromatosis from our hospital, treated at the time of diagnosis and followed over a 30 year period, 43% of men and 28% of women developed life threatening complications.6 This is likely to be an overestimate of the morbidity of haemochromatosis because of a referral bias. A major impediment in the implementation of population screening for haemochromatosis has been this uncertainty about the burden of disease and the natural history of disease in an asymptomatic C282Y homozygote detected by screening. The unique design of the …
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".