MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390954303 · doi:10.1186/s12883-023-03478-y

Expanding the genotype-phenotype spectrum in SCN8A-related disorders

2024· article· en· W4390954303 on OpenAlexafffund
Malavika Hebbar, Nawaf Al-Taweel, Inderpal Gill, Cyrus Boelman, Richard A. Dean, Samuel J. Goodchild, Janette Mezeyova, Noah Gregory Shuart, J. P. Johnson, James Lee, Aspasia Michoulas, Linda Huh, Linlea Armstrong, Mary Connolly, Michelle Demos

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Neurology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsXenon Pharmaceuticals (Canada)BC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAlva FoundationNational Human Genome Research InstituteBC Children's Hospital
KeywordsEpilepsyNeurologyMedicinePhenotypeGenotypeExome sequencingAtaxiaMendelian inheritanceCerebellar ataxiaGenotype-phenotype distinctionGeneticsBioinformaticsBiologyPsychiatryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: SCN8A-related disorders are a group of variable conditions caused by pathogenic variations in SCN8A. Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM) terms them as developmental and epileptic encephalopathy 13, benign familial infantile seizures 5 or cognitive impairment with or without cerebellar ataxia. METHODS: In this study, we describe clinical and genetic results on eight individuals from six families with SCN8A pathogenic variants identified via exome sequencing. RESULTS: Clinical findings ranged from normal development with well-controlled epilepsy to significant developmental delay with treatment-resistant epilepsy. Three novel and three reported variants were observed in SCN8A. Electrophysiological analysis in transfected cells revealed a loss-of-function variant in Patient 4. CONCLUSIONS: This work expands the clinical and genotypic spectrum of SCN8A-related disorders and provides electrophysiological results on a novel loss-of-function SCN8A variant.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score0.669

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC NeurologySame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207