Family‐based transmission disequilibrium test (TDT) and case–control association studies reveal surfactant protein A (SP‐A) susceptibility alleles for respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) and possible race differences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A key cause of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) in the prematurely born infant is deficiency of pulmonary surfactant, a lipoprotein complex. Both low levels of surfactant protein A (SP-A) and SP-A alleles have been associated with RDS. Using the candidate gene approach, we performed family-based linkage studies to discern linkage of SP-A to RDS and identify SP-A susceptibility or protective alleles. Moreover, we performed case-control studies of whites and blacks to detect association between RDS and SP-A alleles. Transmission disequilibrium test (TDT) analysis revealed that the frequency of transmission (from parent to the offspring with RDS) of alleles 6A(2) and 1A(0) and of 1A(0)/6A(2) haplotype in RDS was increased, whereas transmission of alleles 1A(5) and 6A(4) and of haplotype 1A(5)/6A(4) was decreased. Extended TDT analysis further strengthened the observations made. The case-control studies showed that in whites or blacks with RDS the frequencies of specific genotypes, 1A(0) and 6A(2) or 1A(0), were increased, respectively, but the frequency of specific 6A(3) genotypes was increased in certain white subgroups and decreased in blacks. Regression analysis revealed gestational age (GA) and 6A(3) genotypes are significant factors in blacks with RDS. In whites with RDS, GA and antenatal steroids are important factors. The data together indicate linkage between SP-A and RDS; certain SP-A alleles/haplotypes are susceptibility (1A(0), 6A(2), 1A(0)/6A(2)) or protective (1A(5), 6A(4), 1A(5)/6A(4)) factors for RDS. Some differences between blacks and whites with regard to SP-A alleles may exist.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".