MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2424659274 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2016.161

P.057 Distal hereditary motor neuropathy type I due to the GARS: c.1415A>G, p.His472Arg mutation

2016· article· en· W2424659274 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
AG Florendo-Cumbermack, Kurt Kimpinski, Shannon L. Venance

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHereditary Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeaknessMedicineMissense mutationAnatomyPhenotypeGeneticsBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The distal hereditary motor neuropathies (dHMN) have been characterized through case reports and family studies. Their genetic characterization remains a work in progress. An appreciation of the genetic underpinnings may lead to treatment options in the future. Hence reports, like this one, which add to this understanding, remain extremely important. Methods: The clinical presentations, electrophysiology and genetics of two patients with the dHMN I phenotype are described. Results: A mother and son presented with slowly progressive distal weakness of the lower extremities with onset in the first and second decades. Distal weakness of the upper extremities developed later. Examination 20 and 50 years after onset revealed wasting and weakness of distal upper and lower extremity muscles with absent distal and preserved proximal deep tendon reflexes. Sensory examination was normal. Electrodiagnostic studies demonstrated a motor axonopathy. Genetics testing revealed a missense mutation on chromosome 7, exon 11 of the GARS gene: c.1415A>G (p.His472Arg). Conclusions: GARS mutations have been identified in patients with the dHMN I (juvenile onset distal weakness and wasting) and dHMN V (upper limb predominant) phenotypes. However, this mutation has not previously been directly linked to the dHMN I phenotype.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0050.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.258
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicHereditary Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207