MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323320120 · doi:10.2174/138161212799315920

Modifier Gene Studies to Identify New Therapeutic Targets in Cystic Fibrosis

2012· review· en· W2323320120 on OpenAlexaff
Ruslan Dorfman

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Pharmaceutical Design · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCystic fibrosisDiseaseMedicinePopulationBioinformaticsBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the discovery of the CFTR gene mutations which cause cystic fibrosis (CF) in 1989 the average life expectancy of CF patients has almost doubled and now exceeds 37 years. The advances in molecular diagnostics and medical treatments expanded beyond the CF patient population as some of the newest treatments are also being tested for treatment of complex diseases such as COPD and other inherited disorders. Rapid development of CF therapeutics is important for the cystic fibrosis community and is an excellent example for other nonprofit organizations, disease foundations and pharmaceutical companies alike. Better understanding of disease variability and underlying molecular mechanisms through genetic association studies aimed to identify novel CF modifier genes opens new venues for targeted drug design. Furthermore, these genetic studies allow development of molecular diagnostic tests for patient population stratification and treatment personalization, which is already being done for CF patients with specific mutations in the CFTR gene, as well as implementation of new molecular tests for reliable assessment of disease progression and severity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.468
GPT teacher head0.563
Teacher spread0.094 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Pharmaceutical DesignSame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207