MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107026227 · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kel265

Genetic association analysis of LRCH1 as an osteoarthritis susceptibility locus

2006· article· en· W2107026227 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah Snelling, Janet S. Sinsheimer, Andrew Carr, John Loughlin

Bibliographic record

VenueLara D. Veeken · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismSNPOsteoarthritisGeneticsLocus (genetics)Genetic associationGenotypeMedicineBiologyGenePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: A genetic association with knee osteoarthritis (OA) of a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in intron 1 of the LRCH1 gene was recently reported in a UK Caucasian case-control sample and confirmed in a Newfoundland Caucasian sample. Our objective was to assess whether the SNP was associated with OA in our large UK Caucasian sample. METHODS: The SNP was genotyped in 1521 cases that had undergone elective joint replacement of the hip (1098 cases), of the knee (340 cases) or of the hip and knee (83 cases) due to end-stage primary OA. The SNP was also genotyped in 736 controls of similar ages in the cases. RESULTS: There was no significant difference (all P-values >0.05) in genotype or allele frequencies between our cases and our controls. There was also no significant difference when the cases were stratified by sex, by joint replaced or by sex combined with joint replaced. CONCLUSION: Our data on 2257 individuals implies that the LRCH1 intron 1 SNP is not a risk factor for OA aetiology of the knee or of the hip in our UK Caucasian sample.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations27
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLara D. VeekenSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207