MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2422560353 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000002845

Disease burden and functional outcomes in congenital myotonic dystrophy

2016· article· en· W2422560353 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicholas E. Johnson, Russell J. Butterfield, Kiera N. Berggren, Man Hung, Wei Chen, Deanna DiBella, Melissa M. Dixon, Heather Hayes, Evan M Pucillo, Jerry Bounsanga, Chad Heatwole, Craig Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthaTyrAcceleronPTC TherapeuticsIonis PharmaceuticalsValerion TherapeuticsCure SMABiogenMuscular Dystrophy AssociationPfizerNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeParent Project Muscular DystrophyEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineMyotonic dystrophyPhysical therapyQuality of life (healthcare)CohortGrip strengthPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Herein, we describe the disease burden and age-related changes of congenital-onset myotonic dystrophy (CDM) in childhood. METHODS: Children with CDM and age-matched controls aged 0 to 13 years were enrolled. Participants were divided into cohorts based on the following age groups: 0-2, 3-6, and 7-13 years. Each cohort received age-appropriate evaluations including functional testing, oral facial strength testing, neuropsychological testing, quality-of-life measurements, and ECG. Independent-samples t test or Wilcoxon 2-sample test was used to compare the differences between children with CDM and controls. Probability values less than 0.05 are reported as significant. RESULTS: Forty-one participants with CDM and 29 healthy controls were enrolled. The 6-minute walk was significantly different between CDM (258.3 m [SD 176.0]) and control participants (568.2 m [SD 73.2]). The mean lip force strength was significantly different in CDM (2.1 N [SD 2.8)] compared to control participants (17.8 N [SD 7.6]). In participants with CDM, the mean IQ (65.8; SD 18.4) was 3 SDs below the mean compared to standardized norms. Measurements of grip strength, sleep quality, and quality of life were also significantly different. Strength measures (oral facial strength, grip strength, and 6-minute walk) correlated with each other but not with participant IQ. CONCLUSIONS: This work identifies important phenotypes associated with CDM during childhood. Several measures of strength and function were significantly different between participants with CDM and controls and may be useful during future therapeutic trials.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations46
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207