MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093700204 · doi:10.1212/wnl.54.7.1400

Ataxias on the march from Quebec to Tunisia

2000· letter· en· W2093700204 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stefan-M. Pulst, Alessandro Filla

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2000
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtaxiaGeneticsFrataxinSpinocerebellar ataxiaLocus (genetics)PopulationGenetic linkageAlleleBiologyGeneMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this issue of Neurology , Mrissa et al.1 add a new twist to the long list of recent discoveries in the ataxias. They examined a large family with a recessive early-onset ataxia that resembled Friedreich ataxia (FRDA) but differed from it by the preservation of tendon reflexes. Although some FRDA alleles (those caused by relatively short GAA expansions in the frataxin gene) do not lead to lost tendon reflexes (Friedreich ataxia with retained reflexes [FARR]), genetic linkage analysis quickly excluded linkage of the disease mutation to the FRDA locus on human chromosome 9q13. Another recessive ataxia characterized by vitamin E deficiency (AVED) and caused by a mutation in the α-tocopherol transfer protein was excluded as well. It may be surprising at first that the authors also examined linkage to dominant ataxia loci. However, consanguineous marriages and a high frequency of mutant alleles in the population can produce a pseudo-dominant inheritance pattern. When an affected homozygote mates with an unaffected heterozygote, 50% of the offspring will be affected. After the authors had excluded linkage to known dominant spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) loci, Mrissa et al. embarked on a search of the entire human genome for …

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.895

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations6
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207