Matchmaker Exchange
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In well over half of the individuals with rare disease who undergo clinical or research next-generation sequencing, the responsible gene cannot be determined. Some reasons for this relatively low yield include unappreciated phenotypic heterogeneity; locus heterogeneity; somatic and germline mosaicism; variants of uncertain functional significance; technically inaccessible areas of the genome; incorrect mode of inheritance investigated; and inadequate communication between clinicians and basic scientists with knowledge of particular genes, proteins, or biological systems. To facilitate such communication and improve the search for patients or model organisms with similar phenotypes and variants in specific candidate genes, we have developed the Matchmaker Exchange (MME). MME was created to establish a federated network connecting databases of genomic and phenotypic data using a common application programming interface (API). To date, seven databases can exchange data using the API (GeneMatcher, PhenomeCentral, DECIPHER, MyGene2, matchbox, Australian Genomics Health Alliance Patient Archive, and Monarch Initiative; the latter included for model organism matching). This article guides usage of the MME for rare disease gene discovery. © 2017 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".