MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100002590 · doi:10.1111/cge.13882

Description of neurodevelopmental phenotypes associated with 10 genetic neurodevelopmental disorders: A scoping review

2020· review· en· W3100002590 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Genetics · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Children's Hospital Foundation
KeywordsIntellectual disabilityAutism spectrum disorderAutismNeurodevelopmental disorderGenetic diagnosisGenetic heterogeneityIdentification (biology)PsychiatryPsychologyMedicinePhenotypeGeneticsBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) are a heterogeneous group of conditions including intellectual disability, global developmental delay, autism spectrum disorder, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Advances in genetic diagnostic technology have led to the identification of a number of NDD-associated genes, but reports of cognitive and developmental outcomes in affected individuals have been variable. The objective of this scoping review is to synthesize available information pertaining to the developmental outcomes of individuals with pathogenic variants in ten emerging recurrent NDD-associated genes identified from large scale sequencing studies; ADNP, ANKRD11, ARID1B, CHD2, CHD8, CTNNB1, DDX3X, DYRK1A, SCN2A, and SYNGAP1. After a comprehensive search, 260 articles were selected that reported on neurodevelopmental measures or diagnoses. We identify the spectrum of developmental outcomes for each genetic NDD, including prevalence of intellectual disability, frequency of co-morbid NDDs such as ADHD and autism, and commonly reported medical issues that can help inform diagnosis and treatment. There are significant gaps in our understanding of the natural history of these conditions. Future research focusing on barriers to assessment, the development of modified assessment tools appropriate for long-term outcomes in genetic NDD, and collection of longitudinal data will increase understanding of prognosis in these conditions and inform evaluations of treatment.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.275 · 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