MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132760933 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.30502

Unrelated patients with a rearrangement of chromosome 2 causing duplication of 2p23 and deletion of 2q37

2005· review· en· W2132760933 on OpenAlexaff
Linlea Armstrong, Judith Allanson, David D. Weaver, Carole J. Bevan, Holly H. Hobart

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromosomal inversionGene duplicationFrontal BossingBiologyAbnormalityGeneticsChromosomeKaryotypeAnatomyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe two unrelated patients who each have a similar chromosome 2 with duplication of 2p23 to pter, and deletion of 2q37 to qter. In one, the abnormality was derived from his mother with a pericentric inversion. Both individuals have frontal bossing; abnormally formed, low set and posteriorly rotated ears; redundant nuchal skin; inversion of the nipple(s); fleshy fingertips with prominent pads; a sacral dimple; significant developmental delay/mental retardation; and G-tube dependency. Most of these features are present in previously described individuals with either duplication of the 2p terminus or deletion of the 2q terminus. This report is the first that documents postnatal viability of individuals with concurrent duplication of 2p and deletion of 2q, and also generation of this imbalance through rearrangement of a maternally inherited pericentrically inverted 2. This report should be considered in the reproductive counseling of individuals with pericentric inversions of chromosome 2.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part ASame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207