MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889225402 · doi:10.1242/dmm.035832

Fetal growth restriction in a genetic model of sporadic Beckwith–Wiedemann syndrome

2018· article· en· W2889225402 on OpenAlexafffund
Simon J. Tunster, Mathew Van de Pette, Hugo Creeth, Louis Lefebvre, Rosalind M. John

Bibliographic record

VenueDisease Models & Mechanisms · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDirectorate for Biological SciencesBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilCardiff UniversityWaterloo Foundation
KeywordsBeckwith–Wiedemann syndromeFetal growthFetusBiologyGeneticsMedicinePregnancyGeneDNA methylation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Beckwith–Wiedemann syndrome (BWS) is a complex imprinting disorder involving fetal overgrowth and placentomegaly, and is associated with a variety of genetic and epigenetic mutations affecting the expression of imprinted genes on human chromosome 11p15.5. Most BWS cases are linked to loss of methylation at the imprint control region 2 (ICR2) within this domain, which in mice regulates the silencing of several maternally expressed imprinted genes. Modelling this disorder in mice is confounded by the unique embryonic requirement for Ascl2, which is imprinted in mice but not in humans. To overcome this issue, we generated a novel model combining a truncation of distal chromosome 7 allele (DelTel7) with transgenic rescue of Ascl2 expression. This novel model recapitulated placentomegaly associated with BWS, but did not lead to fetal overgrowth.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisease Models & MechanismsSame topicGenetic Syndromes and ImprintingFrench-language works237,207