MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166210552 · doi:10.1002/cpt.280

Pharmacogenetic allele nomenclature: International workgroup recommendations for test result reporting

2015· review· en· W2166210552 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of HealthNational Cancer InstituteNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Institute on Drug AbuseWellcome Trust
KeywordsWorkgroupStandardizationConfusionPharmacogeneticsNomenclatureChemical nomenclatureTransparency (behavior)Computer scienceComputational biologyMedicineBiologyGeneticsPsychologyGeneTaxonomy (biology)Genotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article provides nomenclature recommendations developed by an international workgroup to increase transparency and standardization of pharmacogenetic (PGx) result reporting. Presently, sequence variants identified by PGx tests are described using different nomenclature systems. In addition, PGx analysis may detect different sets of variants for each gene, which can affect interpretation of results. This practice has caused confusion and may thereby impede the adoption of clinical PGx testing. Standardization is critical to move PGx forward.

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.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.643
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.713
GPT teacher head0.662
Teacher spread0.051 · 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