MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377221271 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.c.32045

Rod‐cone dystrophy in an adult with <scp><i>GNB1</i></scp>‐related disorder: An expansion of the phenotype and natural history

2023· article· en· W4377221271 on OpenAlexaff
Xiao‐Ru Yang, Faazil Kassam, A. Micheil Innes

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part C Seminars in Medical Genetics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeterotrimeric G proteinHaploinsufficiencyBiologyPhenotypeDystrophyProtein subunitGeneticsSignal transductionGeneG protein

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract GNB1‐related disorder is characterized by intellectual disability, abnormal tone, and other variable neurologic and systemic features. GNB1 encodes the β1 subunit of the heterotrimeric G‐protein, a complex with a key role in signal transduction. Consistent with its particularly high expression in rod photoreceptors, Gβ1 forms a subunit of retinal transducin (Gαtβ1γ1), which mediates phototransduction. In mice, GNB1 haploinsufficiency has been associated with retinal dystrophy. In humans, however, although vision and eye movement abnormalities are common in individuals with GNB1‐related disorder, rod‐cone dystrophy is not yet an established feature of this condition. We expand the phenotype of GNB1‐related disorder with the first confirmed report of rod‐cone dystrophy in an affected individual, and contribute to a further understanding of the natural history of this condition in a mildly affected 45‐year‐old adult.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part C Seminars in Medical GeneticsSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207