MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bardet-Biedl Syndrome

2000· article· en· W2069694568 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia K. Hrynchak

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and Kidney Cyst Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBardet–Biedl syndromePolydactylyRetinitis pigmentosaMedicinePediatricsDystrophyDiseaseAtrophyCiliopathyOphthalmologyRetinalInternal medicinePathologyAnatomyGeneticsPhenotypeBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This case report describes the presentation of a patient with Bardet-Biedl syndrome. Bardet-Biedl Syndrome is an autosomal recessive condition that includes retinal dystrophy, dystrophic extremities (commonly polydactyly), obesity, hypogenitalism, and renal disease. Cognitive deficit has also been considered part of the syndrome. The historically associated Laurence-Moon syndrome includes spastic paraparesis but not the obesity and polydactyly. They are now considered separate conditions. The most common feature of Bardet-Biedl syndrome is retinal dystrophy. The appearance of the retina in the condition is quite variable with typical retinitis pigmentosa being present in only a minority of cases. The associated optic atrophy can be primary in nature and might play a role in the decreased central vision. Diagnosis of the condition is important for visual prognosis and low vision management. The renal disease often goes undetected until specific radiological testing is done after diagnosis of Bardet-Biedl syndrome. This is significant in that early death often occurs in this condition because of the renal disease.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations10
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptometry and Vision ScienceSame topicGenetic and Kidney Cyst DiseasesFrench-language works237,207