Rationale, Design, and the Baseline Characteristics of the RHDGen (The Genetics of Rheumatic Heart Disease) Network Study†
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The genetics of rheumatic heart disease (RHDGen) Network was developed to assist the discovery and validation of genetic variations and biomarkers of risk for rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in continental Africans, as a part of the global fight to control and eradicate rheumatic fever/RHD. Thus, we describe the rationale and design of the RHDGen study, comprising participants from 8 African countries. METHODS: RHDGen screened potential participants using echocardiography, thereafter enrolling RHD cases and ethnically-matched controls for whom case characteristics were documented. Biological samples were collected for conducting genetic analyses, including a discovery case-control genome-wide association study (GWAS) and a replication trio family study. Additional biological samples were also collected, and processed, for the measurement of biomarker analytes and the biomarker analyses are underway. RESULTS: Participants were enrolled into RHDGen between December 2012 and March 2018. For GWAS, 2548 RHD cases and 2261 controls (3301 women [69%]; mean age [SD], 37 [16.3] years) were available. RHD cases were predominantly Black (66%), Admixed (24%), and other ethnicities (10%). Among RHD cases, 34% were asymptomatic, 26% had prior valve surgery, and 23% had atrial fibrillation. The trio family replication arm included 116 RHD trio probands and 232 parents. CONCLUSIONS: RHDGen presents a rare opportunity to identify relevant patterns of genetic factors and biomarkers in Africans that may be associated with differential RHD risk. Furthermore, the RHDGen Network provides a platform for further work on fully elucidating the causes and mechanisms associated with RHD susceptibility and development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".