MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531437623 · doi:10.1111/cge.12892

<scp>CHARGE</scp> syndrome gastrointestinal involvement: from mouth to anus

2016· review· en· W2531437623 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra Hudson, Marilyn Macdonald, Jeremy Friedman, Kim Blake

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Genetics · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Ear and Nasal Anomalies
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreHospital for Sick ChildrenDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCHARGE syndromeGERDGastroparesisMedicineChromodomainCraniofacialGenetic disorderHaploinsufficiencyDiseaseGastroenterologyInternal medicineRefluxBiologyGastric emptyingGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CHARGE syndrome is an autosomal dominant disorder that occurs as a result of a heterozygous loss-of-function mutation in the chromodomain helicase DNA-binding (CHD7) gene, which is important for neural crest cell formation. Gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and feeding difficulties are highly prevalent but are often a neglected area of diagnosis, treatment, and research. Cranial nerve dysfunction, craniofacial abnormalities, and other physical manifestations of this syndrome lead to gut dysmotility, sensory impairment, and oral-motor function abnormalities. Over 90% of children need tube feeding early in their life and many experience weak sucking/chewing, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and aspiration. The mainstay of treatment thus far has consisted of feeding therapy, GERD medications, Nissen fundoplication, gastrostomy/jejunostomy, and food texture limitation. Owing to the multitude of severe medical issues associated with this genetic disorder, GI involvement is often overlooked. Here, we report on five patients with CHARGE syndrome who manifested a range of severe GI and feeding difficulties.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.007

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical GeneticsSame topicCongenital Ear and Nasal AnomaliesFrench-language works237,207