MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2480685735 · doi:10.1002/acn3.332

Progression of Friedreich ataxia: quantitative characterization over 5 years

2016· article· en· W2480685735 on OpenAlexaff
Maya Patel, Charles J. Isaacs, Lauren Seyer, Karlla W. Brigatti, Sarah Gelbard, Cassandra J. Strawser, Debbie Foerster, Julianna Shinnick, Kimberly Schadt, Eppie M. Yiu, Martin B. Delatycki, Susan Perlman, George Wilmot, Theresa A. Zesiewicz, Katherine D. Mathews, Christopher M. Gómez, Grace Yoon, S. H. Subramony, Alicia Brocht, Jennifer Farmer, David R. Lynch

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Clinical and Translational Neurology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersFriedreich's Ataxia Research Alliance
KeywordsMedicineAtaxiaClinical trialRating scaleNatural history studyPediatricsDiseaseInternal medicinePsychiatryPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Friedreich ataxia (FRDA) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder of adults and children. This study analyzed neurological outcomes and changes to identify predictors of progression and generate power calculations for clinical trials. METHODS: Eight hundred and twelve subjects in a natural history study were evaluated annually across 12 sites using the Friedreich Ataxia Rating Scale (FARS), 9-Hole Peg Test, Timed 25-Foot Walk, visual acuity tests, self-reported surveys and disability scales. Cross-sectional outcomes were assessed from recent visits, and longitudinal changes were gaged over 5 years from baseline. RESULTS: Cross-sectional outcomes correlated with measures of disease severity. Age, genetic severity (guanine-adenine-adenine [GAA] repeat length), and testing site predicted performance. Serial progression was relatively linear using FARS and composite measures of performance, while individual performance outcomes were nonlinear over time. Age strongly predicted change from baseline until removing the effects of baseline FARS scores, when GAA becomes a more important factor. Progression is fastest in younger subjects and subjects with longer GAA repeats. Improved coefficients of variation show that progression results are more reproducible over longer assessment durations. INTERPRETATION: While age predicted progression speed in simple analyses and may provide an effective way to stratify cohorts, separating the effects of age and genetic severity is difficult. Controlling for baseline severity, GAA is the major determinant of progression rate in FRDA. Clinical trials will benefit from enrollment of younger subjects, and sample size requirements will shrink with longer assessment periods. These findings should prove useful in devising gene therapy trials in the near future.

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 score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations143
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Clinical and Translational NeurologySame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207