MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162647412 · doi:10.1126/science.1090010

Characterization of a Common Susceptibility Locus for Asthma-Related Traits

2004· article· en· W2162647412 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tarja Laitinen, Anne Polvi, Pia S. Rydman, Johanna Vendelin, Ville Pulkkinen, Paula Salmikangas, Siru Mäkelä, Marko Rehn, Asta Pirskanen, Anna Rautanen, Marco Zucchelli, Harriet Gullstén, Marina Leino, Harri Alenius, Tuula Petäys, Tari Haahtela, Annika Laitinen, Catherine Laprise, Thomas J. Hudson, Lauri A. Laitinen, Juha Kere

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenotypingHaplotypeBiologyGeneticsLocus (genetics)AsthmaSingle-nucleotide polymorphismAtopyImmunologyGenePathogenesisGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Susceptibility to asthma depends on variation at an unknown number of genetic loci. To identify susceptibility genes on chromosome 7p, we adopted a hierarchical genotyping design, leading to the identification of a 133-kilobase risk-conferring segment containing two genes. One of these coded for an orphan G protein-coupled receptor named GPRA (G protein-coupled receptor for asthma susceptibility), which showed distinct distribution of protein isoforms between bronchial biopsies from healthy and asthmatic individuals. In three cohorts from Finland and Canada, single nucleotide polymorphism-tagged haplotypes associated with high serum immunoglobulin E or asthma. The murine ortholog of GPRA was up-regulated in a mouse model of ovalbumin-induced inflammation. Together, these data implicate GPRA in the pathogenesis of atopy and asthma.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations488
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207