MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2413986821

Risk factors for ovarian cancer and early-onset breast cancer in Mongolia.

2002· article· en· W2413986821 on OpenAlexaff
L Elit, G. Baigal, Elaine Jack, A Munkhtaivan, Narod Sa

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvarian cancerMedicineBreast cancerCancerFamily historyGynecologyOncologyFirst-degree relativesMutationPopulationRisk factorObstetricsInternal medicineDemographyGeneGeneticsEnvironmental healthBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine if there are founder BRCA1 mutations in the Mongolian population. METHODS: Seventeen women with ovarian cancer, 14 women with premenopausal breast cancer and one woman with both cancer types were interviewed to obtain family history, and hormonal, reproductive and environment risk factor information. Blood was collected for DNA analysis from these women to determine the frequency of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in Mongolia. RESULTS: Two patients had two first-degree relatives with cancer and nine women had one first degree relative with cancer. Two women had the unique BRCA1 mutation previously described. These two women were not related but their parents were from the same tribe and they lived in the same imak (province). Only one other patient was of this tribal background and from the same region; however, she did not have the BRCA1 mutation. CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of Mongolian woman with ovarian cancer or early-onset breast cancer may be due to a founder BRCA1 mutation 3452delA.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicBRCA gene mutations in cancer→French-language works237,207→