Hearing Impairment Susceptibility in Elderly Men and the DFNA18 Locus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify any chromosomal region that shows evidence for linkage to age-related hearing loss in humans. DESIGN: Evaluation of genetic linkage using sibling-pair methods for hearing loss collected via self-report questionnaire and markers from a genome screening collected from a population-based representative sample of male fraternal twins born from 1917 to 1927. SUBJECTS: Members of a group of 6108 World War II and Korean War veteran twins (2059 complete pairs) who completed a health history questionnaire at a mean age of 74.3 years (range, 69-82 years). A subset of 711 twins (343 complete pairs) later provided a blood sample for DNA extraction in a study of genetic factors in healthy aging. Among the complete pairs were approximately 160 fraternal twins; 50 of these pairs were concordant for age-related hearing loss with at least 1 co-twin reporting bilateral hearing loss and with marker data available for analysis. RESULTS: A region suggestive of linkage was found on chromosome 3q, with a logarithm of the odds score of 2.5 in the same region of this chromosome where the DFNA18 locus resides, which has been reported to cause a form of progressive hereditary hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first sample from the general population that has been used in a genome screening for qualitative hearing loss. The results, if confirmed, suggest that genetic variation in the region of DFNA18 may be responsible for hearing loss with age in the general 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".