Large Normal and Intermediate Alleles in the Context of SCA2 Prenatal Diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2001 a program for predictive testing of Spinocerebellar Ataxia type 2 was developed in Cuba, based on the detection of an abnormal CAG trinucleotide repeat expansion in the ATXN2 gene. A descriptive study was designed to assess the implications of ATXN2 large normal and intermediate alleles in the context of the SCA2 Prenatal Diagnosis Program. Four clinical scenarios were selected based upon the behaviour of large normal and intermediate alleles when passing from one generation to the next, showing expansions, contractions, or stability in the CAG repeat size. In some populations, traditional Mendelian risk figures of 0 % or 50 % may not be applicable due to the high frequency of unstable large normal alleles. Couples with no family history of SCA2 may have a >0 % risk of having an affected offspring. Similarly, couples in which there is both an expanded and a large normal allele may have a recurrence risk >50 %. It is imperative that these issues be addressed with these couples during genetic counseling. These recurrence risks have to be carefully estimated in the presence of such alleles (particularly alleles ≥27 CAG repeats), carriers need to be aware of the potential risk for their descendants, and programs for prenatal diagnosis must be available for them.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".