Coffin‐Lowry syndrome: A 20‐year follow‐up and review of long‐term outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Coffin-Lowry syndrome has become well established since the first report of affected patients by Coffin et al. [1966: Am J Dis Child 112:205-213]. Since that time over a hundred cases have been reported and the responsible gene has been identified. However, there remains a paucity of long-term follow-up information on older patients with which to counsel affected families about prognosis. There is also much to be learned about genotype-phenotype correlations. In 1982 we reported 12 patients (including carrier mothers) from eight families, one of whom had died about the time the paper was written. Recently, we have been able to obtain follow-up information on six of the affected patients and one of the carrier mothers. A number of important complications have occurred, including premature death, loss of ambulation, and quadriplegia. This paper updates the medical histories of our patients and summarizes the clinically important complications that have been reported in patients with Coffin-Lowry syndrome. There are few data on patients over the age of 30, and much more longer term follow-up is required.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".