Debunking Occam's razor: Diagnosing multiple genetic diseases in families by whole‐exome sequencing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent clinical whole exome sequencing (WES) cohorts have identified unanticipated multiple genetic diagnoses in single patients. However, the frequency of multiple genetic diagnoses in families is largely unknown. AIMS: We set out to identify the rate of multiple genetic diagnoses in probands and their families referred for analysis in two national research programs in Canada. MATERIALS & METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed WES results for 802 undiagnosed probands referred over the past 5 years in either the FORGE or Care4Rare Canada WES initiatives. RESULTS: Of the 802 probands, 226 (28.2%) were diagnosed based on mutations in known disease genes. Eight (3.5%) had two or more genetic diagnoses explaining their clinical phenotype, a rate in keeping with the large published studies (average 4.3%; 1.4 - 7.2%). Seven of the 8 probands had family members with one or more of the molecularly diagnosed diseases. Consanguinity and multisystem disease appeared to increase the likelihood of multiple genetic diagnoses in a family. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the importance of comprehensive clinical phenotyping of family members to ultimately provide accurate genetic counseling.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it