MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100310771 · doi:10.1002/mus.20726

Variability of the recessive oculopharyngeal muscular dystrophy phenotype

2007· article· en· W2100310771 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexander Semmler, Wolfram Kreß, Stefan Vielhaber, Rolf Schröder, Cornelia Kornblum

Bibliographic record

VenueMuscle & Nerve · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOculopharyngeal muscular dystrophyMuscular dystrophyPhenotypeGeneticsAllelePopulationMedicineX chromosomeGeneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oculopharyngeal muscular dystrophy (OPMD) is usually transmitted as an autosomal-dominant trait and characterized by an expansion from 6 to 8 or more GCG/GCA repeats in the poly-(A) binding protein nuclear 1 (PABPN1) gene on chromosome 14q11. Autosomal-recessive OPMD with a homozygous (GCG)7 expansion of PABPN1 has only been described in two Canadian patients, who showed a comparably mild phenotype, suggesting that it is less severe than the dominant form. We clinically and genetically characterized the first two reported cases of autosomal-recessive OPMD in Europe. Remarkably, both patients revealed severe and diverse phenotypes, with an unusual onset and atypical clinical course in one patient. Former studies found a 1%-2% frequency of the (GCG)7 allele, which theoretically produces an incidence of 1:10,000 of autosomal-recessive OPMD in the general population. We conclude that the apparent rarity of the autosomal-recessive form of OPMD may be due to the fact that genetic testing is generally administered only to patients with typical clinical features or a positive family history.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations36
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMuscle & NerveSame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207