MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2678306510 · doi:10.1080/09537104.2017.1317732

The genetics of platelet count and volume in humans

2017· review· en· W2678306510 on OpenAlexafffund
John D. Eicher, Guillaume Lettre, Andrew D. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenuePlatelets · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPlateletMean platelet volumeMedicineVolume (thermodynamics)BiologyGeneticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last decade has witnessed an explosion in the depth, variety, and amount of human genetic data that can be generated. This revolution in technical and analytical capacities has enabled the genetic investigation of human traits and disease in thousands to now millions of participants. Investigators have taken advantage of these advancements to gain insight into platelet biology and the platelet's role in human disease. To do so, large human genetics studies have examined the association of genetic variation with two quantitative traits measured in many population and patient based cohorts: platelet count (PLT) and mean platelet volume (MPV). This article will review the many human genetic strategies-ranging from genome-wide association study (GWAS), Exomechip, whole exome sequencing (WES), to whole genome sequencing (WGS)-employed to identify genes and variants that contribute to platelet traits. Additionally, we will discuss how these investigations have examined and interpreted the functional implications of these newly identified genetic factors and whether they also impart risk to human disease. The depth and size of genetic, phenotypic, and other -omic data are primed to continue their growth in the coming years and provide unprecedented opportunities to gain critical insights into platelet biology and how platelets contribute to disease.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.663

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 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

Citations57
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlateletsSame topicGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207