MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133638705 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwab002.055

A57 THE USE AND INTERPRETATION OF HLA-DQ2/DQ8 GENOTYPING BY PEDIATRIC GASTROENTEROLOGISTS

2021· article· en· W3133638705 on OpenAlexaff
Brigitte Moreau, E Robidoux

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCeliac Disease Research and Management
Canadian institutionsCégep de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenotypingMedicineHuman leukocyte antigenGenotypeHepatologyDiseaseInternal medicineAlleleImmunologyGeneticsAntigenGeneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background A recent classification of high and low risk alleles associated with celiac disease (CD) shows that the presence of a single allele (DQA1*05 or DQB1*02; coding together for HLA-DQ2), without a positive genotype (HLA-DQ2 and or HLA-DQ8), represents a risk of developing the disease. Aims The aim of this study is to evaluate the use and interpretation of the HLA-DQ2/DQ8 genotyping by pediatric gastroenterologists, as there is no study on the matter and the latest guidelines do not address this risk classification. Methods A web-based survey was sent by email to all NASPGHAN (North American society of pediatric gastroenterolgy, hepatology and nutrition) members. Results Results 294 pediatric gastroenterologists sent a complete survey. 86,1% use the HLA-DQ2/DQ8 genotyping according mainly to the NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN guidelines. The main indications considered were to exclude CD in a patient on a gluten-free diet with a resolution of his symptoms and in a seronegative patient with equivocal biopsies. A minority would consider the genotyping for screening high risk groups or for making a diagnosis in children with high specific CD antibodies and strong clinical suspicion without performing biopsies, as suggested by the ESPGHAN guidelines. The alleles associated with CD are not well known, but 76,7% the participants are aware of the risk classification. While only 62,8% have access to the complete genotype, 47,8% consider it useful. Nevertheless, 82,6% would still want to know the presence of a low risk allele. Conclusions The risk classification of alleles related to CD warrants a modification of the genotyping result with access to the alleles and an adaptation of the guidelines. Funding Agencies None

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)0.033
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicCeliac Disease Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207