MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Proactive Variant Effect Mapping to Accelerate Genetic Diagnosis for Pediatric Cardiac Arrest

2022· preprint· en· W4206579322 on OpenAlexaff
Brendan J. Floyd, Jochen Weile, Prince J. Kannankeril, Andrew M. Glazer, Chloe M. Reuter, Calum A. MacRae, Euan A. Ashley, Dan M. Roden, Frederick P. Roth, Victoria N. Parikh

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformed consentMedicineDiseaseIntensive care medicineGenetic diagnosisInternal medicineGenePathologyGeneticsBiologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While genetic testing is becoming standard of care for patients with potentially inherited cardiovascular disease, the prevalence of uncertain results severely limits its utility. One promising approach is to generate variant effect maps that report the function of all possible variants in a gene prospectively. The proactive clinical application of these maps is nascent, and requires careful integration with current American College of Medical Genetics guidelines for variant interpretation. Here, we describe three pediatric cases of cardiac arrest or sudden cardiac death with variants of uncertain significance in calmodulin genes. We demonstrate the prospective clinical utility of a calmodulin variant effect map to inform variant interpretation, and therefore diagnosis and family care, in each case. This study was approved by the Stanford University and Vanderbilt University Medical Center IRBs. Consent was waived based on low risk of de-identified retrospective data collection per the IRB.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207