MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789920956 · doi:10.1177/0883073818756680

Association of Early-Onset Spasticity and Risk for Cognitive Impairment With Mutations at Amino Acid 499 in <i>SPAST</i>

2018· review· en· W2789920956 on OpenAlexaff
Meredith Gillespie, Peter Humphreys, Hugh J. McMillan, Kym M. Boycott

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Neurology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHereditary Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpasticityHereditary spastic paraplegiaMedicinePediatricsSpasticParaplegiaAge of onsetCerebral palsyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhenotypeInternal medicineGeneticsSpinal cordPsychiatryGeneDiseaseBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hereditary spastic paraplegia is a phenotypically and genetically heterogeneous group of neurodegenerative disorders characterized by lower extremity weakness and spasticity. Spastic paraplegia 4 (SPG4), caused by heterozygous mutations in the gene SPAST, typically causes a late-onset, uncomplicated form of hereditary spastic paraplegia in affected individuals. Additional clinical features in SPG4 have been reported on occasion, but no genotype-phenotype correlation has been established. Through targeted clinical testing, we identified 2 unrelated female patients with the same de novo p.Arg499His mutation in SPAST. Both patients presented with early-onset spasticity resulting in delayed motor milestones, which led to a diagnosis of cerebral palsy in one child and tethered cord in the other. Review of the literature identified several patients with mutations at amino acid 499 and early-onset symptoms associated with a risk of cognitive impairment. Early and accurate diagnosis of children with early-onset spasticity is important for informed prognosis and genetic counselling.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child NeurologySame topicHereditary Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207