MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899822892 · doi:10.1186/s12911-018-0684-9

Trio-R: a script for assessing maternity and paternity in trio studies performed on Agilent chromosomal microarrays

2018· article· en· W2899822892 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Xia, Chen Zhang, Va Lip, Marian H. Harris, Yiping Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbandGeneticsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismSNPDNA microarraySNP arrayBiologyComputer scienceComputational biologyGenotypeGeneMutation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Trio studies, which involve the testing of samples from a proband and both parents, are often used by clinical laboratories to help with the classification of genetic variants, including copy number variants. In order for the results of the trio study to be valid, the mother and father must be the true biological parents of the proband. As such, non-paternity and sample mix-ups are potential sources of error. To address these potential issues, we developed a computer script to accurately assess maternity and paternity using single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data generated by Agilent chromosomal microarrays, a platform-of-choice for clinical copy number testing. RESULTS: We assessed the performance of the script on 10 putative trios tested at our laboratory, and found that the numbers and proportions of discordant SNPs were useful for determining parental relationships. The results of the assessment also confirmed maternity and paternity in the 10 trios tested, and by doing so essentially excluded pre-analytical sample switching in these 30 samples. CONCLUSIONS: Computational analysis of SNP data can be implemented as a quality control measure for trio testing performed on Agilent microarrays.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: Software
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.016

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.303 · 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
GenreSoftware

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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical Informatics and Decision MakingSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207