Evidence-based diagnosis of familial non-X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy. Prevalence, inheritance and characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To assess the prevalence of familial non-X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy, to diagnose early asymptomatic cases evaluate inheritance and characterize clinical phenotypes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We screened 472 relatives of 104 consecutive patients diagnosed with dilated cardiomyopathy; males with X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy were excluded based on systematic immunohistochemical and molecular analysis. Relatives underwent clinical examination, electrocardiography, echocardiography and serum creatine-phosphokinase determination. Twenty-six index patients (25%) had familial disease: four youths (< or = 20 years) had rapidly progressive outcome and underwent emergency transplantation. In a sib-pair, the onset was with atrioventricular block. Inheritance was autosomal dominant in 15, undetermined in seven (four sib-pairs); mitochondrial DNA pathological mutations were found in four. The screening identified 23 newly diagnosed relatives in the familial group. Transplantation (P = 0.04) and atrial fibrillation (P = 0.04) were more frequent, and left bundle branch block (P = 0.04) less frequent in index patients with familial than in those with non-familial disease. Several non-affected relatives had instrumental abnormalities potentially useful as pre-clinical markers: their prevalence was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of familial, non X-linked dilated cardiomyopathy was 25%. The immediate benefits of screening family members of index patients was early diagnosis in unaware symptomless affected relatives.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".