MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150223775 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.32245

Clinical genetics and the Hutterite population: A review of Mendelian disorders

2008· review· en· W2150223775 on OpenAlexaff
Kym M. Boycott, Jillian S. Parboosingh, Bernie N. Chodirker, R. Brian Lowry, D. Ross McLeod, Jackie Morris, Cheryl R. Greenberg, Albert E. Chudley, François P. Bernier, Julian Midgley, Lisbeth Birk Møller, A. Micheil Innes

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsChinook Regional HospitalUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of CalgaryChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
FundersLimb Girdle Muscular Dystrophy 2I
KeywordsMendelian inheritancePopulationGeneticsIdentification (biology)BiologyFounder effectEtiologyEvolutionary biologyGeneMedicinePathologyAlleleHaplotypeEcologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Hutterian Bretheren is an isolated population living on the North American prairies, the current community exceeding 40,000 in number. Their unique genetic history has contributed to a founder effect, which is reflected in the Mendelian disorders present in this population today. Genetic studies in the Hutterite population have led to the identification of a number of genes over the last several years and highlights the power of this population for gene identification. However, for the more than 30 autosomal recessive conditions currently recognized in this population, the gene or Hutterite specific mutation remains to be identified for over half and novel autosomal recessive syndromes continue to be recognized. This review summarizes what is currently understood about the molecular etiology of the Mendelian disorders and highlights the cardinal features of those disorders that are unique to or over-represented in this population.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations50
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part ASame topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207