Updated clinical practice recommendations for managing adults with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review aimed to update the clinical practice guidelines for managing adults with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11.2DS). The 22q11.2 Society recruited expert clinicians worldwide to revise the original clinical practice guidelines for adults in a stepwise process according to best practices: (1) a systematic literature search (1992-2021), (2) study selection and synthesis by clinical experts from 8 countries, covering 24 subspecialties, and (3) formulation of consensus recommendations based on the literature and further shaped by patient advocate survey results. Of 2441 22q11.2DS-relevant publications initially identified, 2344 received full-text review, with 2318 meeting inclusion criteria (clinical care relevance to 22q11.2DS) including 894 with potential relevance to adults. The evidence base remains limited. Thus multidisciplinary recommendations represent statements of current best practice for this evolving field, informed by the available literature. These recommendations provide guidance for the recognition, evaluation, surveillance, and management of the many emerging and chronic 22q11.2DS-associated multisystem morbidities relevant to adults. The recommendations also address key genetic counseling and psychosocial considerations for the increasing numbers of adults with this complex condition.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".