The mutational spectrum of type 1 von Willebrand disease: results from a Canadian cohort study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to evaluate the changes within the VWF gene that might contribute to the pathogenesis of type 1 von Willebrand disease (VWD), a large multicenter Canadian study was undertaken. We present data from the sequence analysis of the VWF gene in 123 type 1 VWD index cases and their families. We have identified putative mutations within the VWF gene in 63% (n = 78) of index cases, leaving 37% (n = 45) with no identified changes. These changes comprise 50 different putative mutations: 31 (62%) missense mutations, 8 (16%) changes involving the VWF transcriptional regulatory region, 5 (10%) small deletions/insertions, 5 (10%) splicing consensus sequence mutations, and 1 nonsense mutation. Twenty-one of the index cases had more than one putative VWF mutation identified. We were somewhat more likely to identify putative mutations in cases with lower VWF levels, and the contribution of other factors, such as ABO blood group, seems more important in milder cases. Taken as a whole, our data support a complex spectrum of molecular pathology resulting in type 1 VWD. In more severe cases, genetic changes are common within the VWF gene and are highly penetrant. In milder cases, the genetic determinants are more complex and involve factors outside of the VWF gene.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it