MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392607084 · doi:10.1016/j.gimo.2024.101047

P150: ClinGen hereditary cardiovascular disease gene curation expert panel: reappraisal of the validity of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy genes*

2024· article· en· W4392607084 on OpenAlex
Amber Waddell, Sophie Hespe, Babken Asatryan, Emma Owens, Courtney Thaxton, Mhy-Lanie Adduru, Kailyn Anderson, Emily Brown, Lily Hoffman‐Andrews, Elizabeth Jordan, Megan Mayers, Stacey Peters, Fergus Stafford, Richard D. Bagnall, Lucas Bronicki, Bert Callewaert, C. Anwar A. Chahal, Cynthia A. James, Olga Jarinova, Andrew P. Landstrom, Elizabeth M. McNally, Brittney Murray, Laura Muiño Mosquera, Victoria N. Parikh, Chloe M. Reuter, Roddy Walsh, Bess Wayburn, James S. Ware, Jodie Ingles

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics in Medicine Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneHypertrophic cardiomyopathyDiseaseGeneticsBiologyMedicineCardiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is an inherited heart disease characterized by left ventricular hypertrophy in the absence of loading conditions. It affects approximately 1 in 500 people. Targeted gene panel analysis identifies a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant in ∼40% of individuals, with most variants identified in 8 definitive-evidence sarcomere genes. Here, we report clinical validity reappraisal of previously classified and new HCM genes using the ClinGen gene curation framework.

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.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score0.758

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.240 · 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