MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073236435 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.10221

Possible association of NTDs with a polyhistidine tract polymorphism in the <i>ZIC2</i> gene

2002· article· en· W2073236435 on OpenAlexaff
Lucia Brown, Susan E. Hodge, William G. Johnson, Sandra G. Guy, Jeffrey S. Nye, Stephen Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHedgehog Signaling Pathway Studies
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsGeneticsNeural tubeBiologyHoloprosencephalyMutationGeneFetusEmbryoPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural tube defects (NTDs) and brain malformations represent a common finding in chromosome 13q deletion patients. Hemizygosity for ZIC2, which is located in the 13q32 critical deletion region, results in holoprosencephaly (HPE) in humans, and diminished expression of ZIC2 results in HPE as well as lumbosacral NTDs in mice. Taken together, these observations led us to hypothesize that ZIC2 mutations may be a cause of isolated NTD. To test this, we screened 192 NTD patients for mutations in ZIC2. While we did not find ZIC2 mutations in these patients, we did find some evidence of a possible association between a histidine tract polymorphism in ZIC2 and NTDs. Our sample was too small to reach definitive conclusions, but the evidence is sufficiently intriguing to encourage further research. If this association is confirmed, subtle alterations in ZIC2 activity may confer a risk of NTD.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations35
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical GeneticsSame topicHedgehog Signaling Pathway StudiesFrench-language works237,207