MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288045423 · doi:10.1136/bcr-2021-247901

Fragile X syndrome in a girl with variant Turner syndrome and an isodicentric X chromosome

2022· article· en· W4288045423 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nattaporn Tassanakijpanich, Rachel Wright, Flora Tassone, Suma P. Shankar, Randi J. Hagerman

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Case Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentIntellectual and Developmental Disabilities Research CenterNational Institutes of HealthAzrieli Foundation
KeywordsTurner syndromeGirlX chromosomeTurner's syndromeFragile X syndromeGeneticsBiologyEndocrinologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fragile X (FXS) and Turner (TS) syndromes are X-chromosome-associated disorders. Herein, we report the case of a girl in middle childhood with bicuspid aortic valve in infancy, growth failure, global developmental delay (GDD), visual problems, and coexisting attention-deficit/hyperactivity and anxiety disorders. A high-resolution karyotype in 20 cells revealed 46,X,Idic(X)(p11.21)[19]/45,X[1], suggestive of variant TS. Given her atypical phenotype, subsequent DNA testing was performed. Four FMR1 cytosine-guanine-guanine repeats (30, 410, 580 and 800) were identified, confirming the additional FXS diagnosis. This case study highlights the importance of additional genetic testing in individuals with atypical variant TS, such as unexplained GDD and distinct facial characteristics. The additional FXS diagnosis prompted new therapeutic development for the patient to advance precision healthcare.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Case ReportsSame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207