MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139527122 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.62183

Confined placental mosaicism involving multiple de novo copy number variants associated with fetal growth restriction: A case report

2021· article· en· W3139527122 on OpenAlexafffund
Giulia Gobbo, Victor Yuan, Wendy P. Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCopy-number variationBiologyGeneticsEpigenomePlacentaGene duplicationGeneFetal growthHomologous chromosomeFetusSegmental duplicationGenomePregnancyDNA methylationGene family

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of multiple large (>1 Mb) copy number variants (CNVs) in non-malignant tissue is rare in human genetics. We present a liveborn male with a birth weight below the first percentile associated with placental mosaicism involving eight 2.4-3.9 Mb de novo duplications. We found that the duplications likely co-localized to the same cells, were mosaic in the placenta, and impacted maternal and paternal chromosomes. In addition, 27.4 Mb and 240 genes were duplicated in affected cells, including candidate placental genes KISS1 and REN. We ruled out involvement of homologous recombination-based mechanisms or an altered epigenome in generating the CNVs. This case highlights the diversity of genetic abnormalities in the human placenta and the gaps in our knowledge of how such errors arise.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part ASame topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207