Restless Legs Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genes are involved in the etiology of restless legs syndrome, a common sensorimotor disorder. OBJECTIVES: To replicate and to further characterize our previously reported chromosome 12q linkage results. DESIGN: Family linkage study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 276 individuals from 19 families have been examined using a selection of markers spanning the identified candidate interval on chromosome 12q. RESULTS: Two-point analyses of individual pedigrees indicated that 5 kindreds were consistent with linkage to chromosome 12q. When considering these 5 pedigrees along with the family in which linkage was originally reported, we observed a maximum 2-point logarithm-of-odds score of 5.67 (at theta = 0.10; for marker D12S1636; autosomal recessive) and a maximum multipoint logarithm-of-odds score of 8.84 between the interval defined by markers D12S326 and D12S304. Furthermore, our results also suggest the presence of heterogeneity in restless legs syndrome as linkage was formally excluded across the region in 6 pedigrees. Interestingly, significantly higher periodic leg movements during sleep indices were observed for all probands with restless legs syndrome from linked families. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the presence of a major restless legs syndrome-susceptibility locus on chromosome 12q, which has been designated as RLS1, and also suggest that at least one additional locus may be involved in the origin of this prevalent condition.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".