Fifty years of recognizable patterns of human malformation: Insights and opportunities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Now in its 7th edition, Smith's Recognizable Patterns of Human Malformation was first published in 1970. This 1st edition comprised 135 "dysmorphic syndromes of multiple primary defects" and 12 "single syndromic malformations resulting in secondary defects." Of the former, other than a few chromosomal and environmental disorders, most were heritable conditions of then unknown etiology. In 2021, the majority of these conditions are now "solved," a notable exception is Hallermann-Streiff syndrome. The "solved" conditions were typically clinically delineated decades prior to understanding the underlying etiology, which rarely required recent technologies such as exome sequencing (ES) to elucidate. The 7th edition includes nearly 300 syndromes, sequences, and associations. An increasing number of conditions first appearing in the latest editions are sporadic, with many solved using either array CGH or ES. We have reviewed all syndromes that have appeared in "Smith's" with a focus on inheritance, heterogeneity, and year and method of etiologic discovery. Several themes emerge. Genetic heterogeneity and pleiotropy of genes are frequent. Several of the currently "unresolved" syndromes are clinically diverse such as Dubowitz syndrome. Multiple recurrent constellations of embryonic malformations, with VACTERL association as a paradigm, are increasingly likely to have a shared pathogenesis requiring further study.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".