MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214817152 · doi:10.3410/f.738643432.793581706

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Investigating Developmental and Epileptic Encephalopathy Using Drosophila melanogaster.

2021· dataset· en· W4214817152 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Lasko

Bibliographic record

VenueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOMIM : Online Mendelian Inheritance in ManEpilepsyContext (archaeology)Induced pluripotent stem cellNeuroscienceDrosophila melanogasterMendelian inheritanceEpileptic spasmsBiologyMedicineBioinformaticsGeneticsGeneEmbryonic stem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs) are the spectrum of severe epilepsies characterized by early-onset, refractory seizures occurring in the context of developmental regression or plateauing. Early infantile epileptic encephalopathy (EIEE) is one of the earliest forms of DEE, manifesting as frequent epileptic spasms and characteristic electroencephalogram findings in early infancy. In recent years, next-generation sequencing approaches have identified a number of monogenic determinants underlying DEE. In the case of EIEE, 85 genes have been registered in Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man as causative genes. Model organisms are indispensable tools for understanding the in vivo roles of the newly identified causative genes. In this review, we first present an overview of epilepsy and its genetic etiology, especially focusing on EIEE and then briefly summarize epilepsy research using animal and patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) models. The Drosophila model, which is characterized by easy gene manipulation, a short generation time, low cost and fewer ethical restrictions when designing experiments, is optimal for understanding the genetics of DEE. We therefore highlight studies with Drosophila models for EIEE and discuss the future development of their practical use. PMID: 32899411 Funding information This work was supported by: Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Grant ID: JP18K07796

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1380.074

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.289 · 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
GenreDataset

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 venueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical LiteratureSame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207