MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335564227 · doi:10.1097/scs.0b013e3181f75412

Coronal Synostosis Syndrome (Muenke Syndrome)

2011· article· en· W2335564227 on OpenAlexaffabout
Adrianna Ranger, Navjot Chaudhary, J. B. Venkat Rau, Damic Matir, Sharan Goobie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Craniofacial Surgery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCraniofacial Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrontal BossingMedicineCraniosynostosisHypertelorismCrouzon syndromeBrachycephalyMacrocephalyCoronal planeMissense mutationCraniofacialSynostosisPtosisDysostosisAnatomySurgeryPediatricsSkullMutationGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Muenke syndrome is a fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR-3)-associated coronal craniosynostosis syndrome, which was first described in 1997. CASE: We report an infant girl who was born to a 29-year-old primapara at 38 weeks' gestation. When evaluated at 3 days old, physical examination revealed a high forehead with frontal bossing, upturned nose, arched palate, shallow midface structures, and heavily ridged coronal sutures bilaterally. Clinically, the infant seemed to be neurologically normal. Skull radiographs and computed tomography confirmed the presence of bilateral coronal synostosis, with patency of all other sutures. Family history was remarkable, in that the infant's father, paternal grandmother, and a paternal cousin demonstrated subtle craniofacial features, which had not been previously identified. Mutation analysis of FGFR-3 revealed a missense mutation in exon 6, c.749 C>G, with a resultant amino acid change from proline to arginine at codon 250 (P250R), in keeping with Muenke syndrome (Am J Hum Genet 1997;60:555-564). The mutation was subsequently identified in her father, suggesting variable expression in this family, as he had only mild midfacial flattening. At 9 months of age, our patient underwent anterior cranial expansion, correction of orbital hypertelorism, intracranial orbital osteotomies, and advancement of the frontal bandeau. She tolerated the procedure well and has done well postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: We report the case of an infant with Muenke syndrome, with evidence of variable expressivity within the paternal family. The pertinent literature, in which only 2 prior Canadian cases were identified, is reviewed.

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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Craniofacial SurgerySame topicCraniofacial Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207