The Canadian “National Program for hemophilia mutation testing” database: A ten‐year review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A reference genotyping laboratory was established in 2000 at Queen's University, Kingston, to provide genetic testing for Hemophilia A (HA) and B (HB) and create a Canadian mutation database. Canadian hemophilia treatment centers and genetics clinics provided DNA and clinical information from November 2000 to March 2011. The factor VIII (F8) gene was analyzed in 1,177 patients (47% of HA population) and 787 female family members and the factor IX (F9) gene in 267 patients (47% of HB population) and 123 female family members, using Southern Blot, PCR, conformation sensitive gel electrophoresis, and/or direct sequencing. The mutation detection rates for HA and HB were 91% and 94%, respectively. 380 different F8 mutations were identified: inversions of intron 22 and intron 1, 229 missense, 45 nonsense, eight deletions, 70 frameshifts, 25 splice site, and one compound mutation with a splice site and intron 1 inversion. Of these mutations, 228 were novel to the Hemophilia A Database (HADB, http://hadb.org.uk/). A total 125 different F9 mutations were identified: 80 missense, 12 frameshift, 12 splice site, nine nonsense and seven promoter mutations, three large deletions, and two compound mutations with both missense and nonsense changes. Of these mutations, 36 were novel to the International Haemophilia B Mutation database (http://www.kcl.ac.uk/ip/petergreen/haemBdatabase.html). The Canadian F8 and F9 mutation database reflects the allelic heterogeneity of HA and HB, and is similar to previously described populations. This report represents the largest and longest duration experience of a national hemophilia genotyping program documented, to date.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.021 | 0.029 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".