MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074404510 · doi:10.1002/humu.10082

Arab genetic disease database (AGDDB): A population-specific clinical and mutation database

2002· article· en· W2074404510 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad S. Teebi, Saeed A. Teebi, Christopher J. Porter, A. Jamie Cuticchia

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Mutation · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Rare Diseases
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoSickKids Foundation
FundersJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsDatabaseOMIM : Online Mendelian Inheritance in ManBiologyReference databasePopulationMendelian inheritanceGeneticsComputer scienceGeneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here we present the Arab Genetic Disease Database (AGDDB), a curated catalog of genetic disorders found in Arab populations. The first release of the database is populated primarily with information from the textbook Genetic Disorders Among Arab Populations [Teebi and Farag, 1997]. AGDDB is composed of data elements revolving around disorder reports. Other reports cover clinical, genomic, reference, and population frequency elements and their important attributes. The Arab Genetic Disease Consortium (30 investigators, 18 countries) is responsible for editing and reviewing AGDDB data. After initial indexing, AGDDB contains over 1,000 unique disorder entries. Entries are linked to their counterparts in the Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM) database; similar associations with relevant locus-specific and central mutation databases are planned. The database can be queried by keyword across all its fields, with more focused searches allowed. The database is freely available and may be accessed at www.agddb.org. The database serves as a robust prototype for cataloging variation and disorder information within a specific population.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.484
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

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

Citations32
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman MutationSame topicGenomics and Rare DiseasesFrench-language works237,207