MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145582282 · doi:10.1080/13816810701199423

Attitudes Regarding Predictive Testing for Retinitis Pigmentosa

2007· article· en· W2145582282 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic Genetics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersOogfonds
KeywordsPredictive testingRetinitis pigmentosaMedicineDna testingDistressGenetic testingPredictive valuePredictive validityProspective cohort studyClinical psychologyPsychologyInternal medicineGeneticsOphthalmologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To assess attitudes towards predictive testing for autosomal dominant retinitis pigmentosa (ADRP). METHODS: A prospective questionnaire study of 46 affected adults and their adult family members identified from pedigrees clearly consistent with ADRP or who had had DNA-testing confirmation of ADRP before the study commenced. RESULTS: High proportions of unaffected siblings (73%) and patients (67%) agreed to prenatal testing. Patients agreed to prenatal testing. Patients agreed significantly more often than unaffected siblings that treatment should be available prior to initiating predictive testing. Psychoemotional distress was reported in 57% of the affected adults and their family members in recollecting their own predictive testing as children. CONCLUSIONS: ADRP families indicate a favorable attitude towards testing presymptomatic children with counseling to lessen the psychological and social impact of results.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.294
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