MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162993589 · doi:10.1002/jcb.24597

Investigation of Rett syndrome using pluripotent stem cells

2013· review· en· W2162993589 on OpenAlexaff
Rana Dajani, S.-H. Koo, Gareth J. Sullivan, In‐Hyun Park

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cellular Biochemistry · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of HealthNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsRett syndromeInduced pluripotent stem cellReprogrammingMECP2Embryonic stem cellBiologyEpigeneticsNeuroscienceStem cellCell biologyPhenotypeGeneticsCellGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rett syndrome (RTT) is one of most prevalent female neurodevelopmental disorders. De novo mutations in X-linked MECP2 are mostly responsible for RTT. Since the identification of MeCP2 as the underlying cause of RTT, murine models have contributed to understanding the pathophysiology of RTT and function of MeCP2. Reprogramming is a procedure to produce induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) by overexpression of four transcription factors. iPSCs obtain similar features as embryonic stem cells and are capable of self-renewing and differentiating into cells of all three layers. iPSCs have been utilized in modeling human diseases in vitro. Neurons differentiated from RTT-iPSCs showed the recapitulation of RTT phenotypes. Despite the early success, genetic and epigenetic instability upon reprogramming and ensuing maintenance of iPSCs raise concerns in using RTT-iPSCs as an accurate in vitro model. Here, we update the current iPSC-based RTT modeling, and its concerns and challenges.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations28
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cellular BiochemistrySame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207