MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107614855 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.10513

A risk‐factor model of epistatic interaction, focusing on autism

2002· article· en· W2107614855 on OpenAlexaff
Marshall B. Jones, Péter Szatmári

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutismEpistasisRisk factorGeneticsEtiologyBiologyPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineGenePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research to date on the genetics of autism has not uncovered a major susceptibility locus and indications are that a number of genes, perhaps as many as 15-20, may play detectable but minor roles in the etiology of the condition. To cope with this situation, a risk-factor model based on standard epidemiologic designs is proposed. The model supposes that adding a factor to a fixed set of existing factors always increases the total risk. Thus, according to the model genetic contributions cumulate but are not necessarily additive. A threshold, hence, epistasis is required. The model is applied to several conditions in which the risk of autism is elevated, some genetic (fragile X, tuberous sclerosis) and some exogenous (rubella and thalidomide embryopathies). Male gender is discussed as a risk factor. This approach is contrasted primarily with Gillberg and Coleman's view of autism as "a syndrome or series of syndromes caused by many different separate individual diseases." The principal point of difference is whether the effects of different causes cumulate or do not cumulate. In the present approach they do, in Gillberg and Coleman's they do not.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.837

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations44
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical GeneticsSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207