MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797194936 · doi:10.1002/mds.27352

Genotype‐Phenotype Relations for the Parkinson's Disease Genes <i>Parkin</i>, <i>PINK1</i>, <i>DJ1:</i> MDSGene Systematic Review

2018· review· en· W2797194936 on OpenAlexaff
Meike Kasten, Corinna Hartmann, Jennie Hampf, Susen Schaake, Ana Westenberger, Eva‐Juliane Vollstedt, Alexander Balck, Aloysius Domingo, Franca Vulinović, Marija Dulović, Ingo Zorn, Harutyun Madoev, Hanna Zehnle, Christina M. Lembeck, Leopold Schawe, Jennifer Reginold, Jana Huang, Inke R. König, Lars Bertram, Connie Marras, Katja Lohmann, Christina M. Lill, Christine Klein

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftInternational Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society
KeywordsParkinPINK1DyskinesiaPedigree chartPhenotypeGeneticsDiseaseGenetic heterogeneityGenotypeParkinson's diseaseHuman geneticsMovement disordersBiologyMedicineBioinformaticsGenePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This first comprehensive MDSGene review is devoted to the 3 autosomal recessive Parkinson's disease forms: PARK-Parkin, PARK-PINK1, and PARK-DJ1. It followed MDSGene's standardized data extraction protocol and screened a total of 3652 citations and is based on fully curated phenotypic and genotypic data on >1100 patients with recessively inherited PD because of 221 different disease-causing mutations in Parkin, PINK1, or DJ1. All these data are also available in an easily searchable online database (www.mdsgene.org), which also provides descriptive summary statistics on phenotypic and genetic data. Despite the high degree of missingness of phenotypic features and unsystematic reporting of genotype data in the original literature, the present review recapitulates many of the previously described findings including early onset (median age at onset of ∼30 years for carriers of at least 2 mutations in any of the 3 genes) of an overall clinically typical form of PD with excellent treatment response, dystonia and dyskinesia being relatively common and cognitive decline relatively uncommon. However, when comparing actual data with common expert knowledge in previously published reviews, we detected several discrepancies. We conclude that systematic reporting of phenotypes is a pressing need in light of increasingly available molecular genetic testing and the emergence of first gene-specific therapies entering clinical trials. © 2018 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
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: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0130.014
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations323
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovement DisordersSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207