MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795603529 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.38645

Elucidating the diagnostic odyssey of 22q11.2 deletion syndrome

2018· article· en· W2795603529 on OpenAlexafffund
Lisa D. Palmer, Nancy J. Butcher, Erik Boot, Kathleen Hodgkinson, Tracy Heung, Eva W.C. Chow, Alina Guna, T. Blaine Crowley, Elaine H. Zackai, Donna M. McDonald‐McGinn, Anne S. Bassett

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCongenital heart defects research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsFondation Brain Canada
KeywordsDeletion syndromeGeneticsBiologyDiGeorge syndromeMedicinePhenotypeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical molecular testing has been available for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11.2DS) for over two decades yet under-recognition and diagnostic delays are common. To characterize the "diagnostic odyssey" in 22q11.2DS we studied 202 well-characterized unrelated adults, none ascertained through an affected relative. We used a regression model to identify clinical and demographic factors associated with length of time to molecular diagnosis. Kaplan-Meier analysis compared time to diagnosis for the molecular testing era (since 1994) and earlier birth cohorts. The results showed that the median time to molecular diagnosis of the 22q11.2 deletion was 4.7 (range 0-20.7) years. Palatal and cardiac anomalies, but not developmental delay/intellectual disability, were associated with a shorter time to molecular diagnosis. Non-European ethnicity was associated with longer time to diagnosis. Inclusion of a cohort from another 22q11.2DS center increased power to observe a significantly earlier diagnosis for patients born in the molecular testing era. Nonetheless, only a minority were diagnosed in the first year of life. On average, patients were seen in seven (range 2-15) different clinical specialty areas prior to molecular diagnosis. The findings indicate that even for those born in the molecular testing era, individuals with 22q11.2DS and their families face a diagnostic odyssey that is often prolonged, particularly in the absence of typical physical congenital features or for those of non-European ancestry. The results support educational efforts to improve clinical recognition and testing, and ultimately newborn screening as a means of maximizing early detection that would provide the best opportunity to optimize outcomes.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations66
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part ASame topicCongenital heart defects researchFrench-language works237,207