MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531767262 · doi:10.1007/s10897-016-0029-8

A Review of the Genetics of Intracranial Berry Aneurysms and Implications for Genetic Counseling

2016· review· en· W2531767262 on OpenAlexafffund
E. Hitchcock, William T. Gibson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Genetic Counseling · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMoyamoya disease diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchBrain Aneurysm FoundationBC Children's HospitalChildren's Hospital Foundation
KeywordsGenetic counselingFamily historyMarfan syndromeGenetic testingMedicineDiseaseMedical geneticsGeneticsMendelian inheritanceGenetic linkageHuman geneticsBiologyPathologyInternal medicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here we review the current understanding of the genetic architecture of intracranial berry aneurysms (IBA) to aid in the genetic counseling of patients at risk for this condition. The familial subtype of IBA, familial intracranial aneurysms (FIA), is associated with increased frequency of IBA, increased risk of rupture, and increased morbidity and mortality after rupture. Family history is the strongest predictor for the development of IBA. However, a genetic test is not yet available to assess risk within a family. Studies using linkage analysis, genome-wide association, and next-generation sequencing have found several candidate loci and genes associated with disease onset, but have not conclusively implicated a single gene. In addition to family history, a separate or concurrent diagnosis of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease is a strong genetic risk factor for IBA formation. We also discuss the relative risk for developing IBA in several Mendelian syndromes including vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, Marfan syndrome, Neurofibromatosis Type I, and Loeys-Dietz syndrome.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations45
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Genetic CounselingSame topicMoyamoya disease diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207