The correlation between rs2501577 gene polymorphism and biliary atresia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Importance: Multiple studies indicate a possible correlation between ADD3 rs2501577 and biliary atresia susceptibility; however, a conclusive determination has yet to be made. Objective: Investigate the role of ADD3 rs2501577 in biliary atresia susceptibility across diverse populations. Data Sources: The study protocol has been registered on PROSPERO, an international platform for systematic review registration (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023384641). The following databases will be searched until February 1, 2023: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, CBM, Web of Science, and CNKI. Study Selection: Eight studies were selected from seven papers to assess the data. A total of 7,651 participants were included, consisting of 1,662 in the BA group and 5,989 in the NC group. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed while conducting the systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Two authors independently assessed the quality of the included studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The significance of the pooled odds ratio (OR) was evaluated with a Z test, and statistical heterogeneity across studies was assessed using the I2 and Q statistics. Publication bias was assessed using Egger’s and Begg’s tests. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): The primary study outcome was the development of biliary atresia. Subgroup analysis was performed based on race, region, and assessment of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE). Results: The studies indicate that the ADD3 rs2501577 susceptibility locus increases the risk of developing biliary atresia, regardless of allelic, homozygote, dominant, and recessive gene inheritance models. Furthermore, ADD3 has been found to be associated with apoptosis, cell cycle, and cell damage repair based on functional analysis. Conclusions and Relevance: The ADD3 rs2501577 polymorphic locus is associated with an increased risk of biliary atresia, particularly in Asian populations. This study recommends further investigation of the ADD3 rs2501577 locus in Asian populations to validate its role in the diagnosis of biliary atresia.
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 | 0.019 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.035 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".