MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587099115 · doi:10.1111/cge.12987

Debunking Occam's razor: Diagnosing multiple genetic diseases in families by whole‐exome sequencing

2017· review· en· W2587099115 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Tuğçe B. Balcı, Taila Hartley, Y. Xi, David A. Dyment, Chandree L. Beaulieu, François P. Bernier, Lucie Dupuis, Gabriella Horváth, Roberto Mendoza‐Londono, C. Prasad, Julie Richer, Xia Yang, Christine M. Armour, Eric Bareke, Bridget A. Fernandez, Hugh J. McMillan, Ryan E. Lamont, Jacek Majewski, Jillian S. Parboosingh, Asuri N. Prasad, C. Anthony Rupar, Jeremy Schwartzentruber, Amanda Smith, Martine Tétreault, A. Micheil Innes, Kym M. Boycott

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Genetics · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Rare Diseases
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern UniversityBC Children's HospitalMemorial University of NewfoundlandAlberta Children's HospitalMcGill UniversityChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British ColumbiaHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Genomics InstituteGenome Canada
KeywordsOccam's razoroccamExome sequencingExomeGeneticsBiologyComputational biologyComputer scienceMutationGeneProgramming languageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations146
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical GeneticsSame topicGenomics and Rare DiseasesFrench-language works237,207