MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CCMG guidelines: prenatal and postnatal diagnostic testing for uniparental disomy

2010· article· en· W2117476997 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Genetics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreMcMaster UniversityVictoria General HospitalMontreal Children's HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioAlberta Children's HospitalDiagnostic Services Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUniparental disomyGenetic testingPrenatal diagnosisGuidelineMedicineDiagnostic testGenetic counselingMedical geneticsGeneticsFamily medicinePediatricsBiologyPregnancyChromosomeKaryotypePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dawson AJ, Chernos J, McGowan-Jordan J, Lavoie J, Shetty S, Steinraths M, Wang J-C, Xu J. CCMG guidelines: prenatal and postnatal diagnostic testing for uniparental disomy. The aim of this statement is to provide clinicians, cytogeneticists and molecular geneticists of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists (CCMG) a comprehensive review of the role of UPD in constitutional genetic diagnosis and to provide a guideline as to when investigation for UPD is recommended. Members of the CCMG Cytogenetics, Molecular Genetics, Clinical Practice, and Prenatal Diagnosis committees reviewed the relevant literature on uniparental disomy (UPD) in constitutional genetic diagnosis (May 2010). Guidelines were developed for UPD testing in Canada. The guidelines were circulated for comment to the CCMG members at large and following appropriate modification, approved by the CCMG Board of Directors (July 2010).

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 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)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.886

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.312 · 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