Bibliographic record
Abstract
Distal chromosome 22q11.2 microduplications are associated with a wide range of phenotypes and unclear pathogenicity. The authors report on a 3-year-old girl with global developmental delay harboring a de novo 1.24 Mb distal chromosome 22q11.2 microduplication and a paternally inherited 0.25 Mb chromosome 4p14 microduplication. The authors review clinical features of 30 reported cases of distal 22q11.2 duplications. Common features include developmental delay (93%), neuropsychiatric features (26%), and nonspecific facial dysmorphisms (74%). In 70% of cases, the distal 22q11.2 duplications were inherited, and the majority of the carrier parents were phenotypically normal. Furthermore, 30% of probands carried an additional copy number variant. Review of the phenotype in individuals carrying microduplications involving similar low copy repeats (LCR) failed to establish any clear genotype-phenotype correlations. Distal 22q11.2 duplications represent a major challenge for genetic counseling and prediction of clinical consequences. Our report suggests a pathogenic role of distal 22q11.2 duplications and supports a "multiple hit" hypothesis underlying its variable expressivity and phenotypic severity.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".