MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147412560 · doi:10.1016/s0895-7061(00)01215-2

Altered frequency of a promoter polymorphism of the kinin B2 receptor gene in hypertensive African-Americans

2000· article· en· W2147412560 on OpenAlexaff
James V. Gainer, Nancy J. Brown, Magdalena Bachvarova, L. Bastien, Isabelle Maltais, François Marceau, Dimcho Bachvarov

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Hypertension · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicApelin-related biomedical research
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHôtel-Dieu de Québec
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsKininAlleleMedicinePolymorphism (computer science)ReceptorGene polymorphismAllele frequencyInternal medicineGeneEssential hypertensionEndocrinologyPathophysiologyGeneticsImmunologyBlood pressureBiologyBradykinin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Components of the kallikrein kinin system have been associated with the pathophysiology of hypertension in animal and human studies. In this study, we examined the distribution of four different polymorphisms of the kinin B1 and B2 receptor genes in a population of 120 normotensive and 77 hypertensive African-Americans. Allelic frequencies for three of the four polymorphisms were significantly different from those previously reported in Caucasian populations. Among the polymorphisms analyzed, a potentially functionally significant polymorphism in the core promoter of the kinin B2 receptor (C-58-->T transition) displayed an increased prevalence of the C-58 allele in the hypertensive patients as compared with the controls (0.75 v. 0.62, P = .009). Thus, this B2 receptor promoter polymorphism may represent a susceptibility marker for essential hypertension in African-Americans.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations54
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of HypertensionSame topicApelin-related biomedical researchFrench-language works237,207