MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754733929 · doi:10.1016/j.ymgme.2017.09.007

Assessments of neurocognitive and behavioral function in the mucopolysaccharidoses

2017· review· en· W2754733929 on OpenAlexaff
Elsa Shapiro, Maria L. Escolar, Kathleen Delaney, John J. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Genetics and Metabolism · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLysosomal Storage Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMontreal Children's Hospital
FundersBioMarin Pharmaceutical
KeywordsNeurocognitiveCognitionMucopolysaccharidosisMedicineDiseaseIntensive care medicinePsychologyPediatricsPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mucopolysaccharidoses (MPS) are a group of rare, inherited lysosomal storage disorders in which accumulation of glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) leads to progressive tissue and organ dysfunction. In addition to a variety of somatic signs and symptoms, patients with rapidly progressing MPS I (Hurler), II, III, and VII can present with significant neurological manifestations, including impaired cognitive abilities, difficulties in language and speech, behavioral abnormalities, sleep problems, and/or seizures. Neurological symptoms have a substantial impact on the quality of life of MPS patients and their families. Due to the progressive nature of cognitive impairment in these MPS patients, neurocognitive function is a sensitive indicator of disease progression, and a relevant outcome when testing efficacy of therapies for these disorders. In order to effectively manage and develop therapies that address neurological manifestations of MPS, it is important to use appropriate neurocognitive assessment tools that are sensitive to changes in neurocognitive function in MPS patients. This review discusses expert opinions on key issues and considerations for effective neurocognitive testing in MPS patients. In addition, it describes the neurocognitive assessment tools that have been used in clinical practice for these patients. The content of this review is based on existing literature and information from a meeting of international experts with extensive experience in managing and treating MPS disorders.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations63
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Genetics and MetabolismSame topicLysosomal Storage Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207