An integrated clinical approach to children at genetic risk for neurodevelopmental and psychiatric conditions: interdisciplinary collaboration and research infrastructure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A sizeable proportion of pathogenic genetic variants identified in young children tested for congenital differences are associated with neurodevelopmental psychiatric disorders (NPD). In this growing group, a genetic diagnosis often precedes the emergence of diagnosable developmental concerns. Here, we describe DAGSY (Developmental Assessment of Genetically Susceptible Youth), a novel interdisciplinary 'genetic-diagnosis-first' clinic integrating psychiatric, psychological and genetic expertise, and report our first observations and feedback from families and referring clinicians. METHODS: We retrieved data on referral sources and indications, genetic and NPD diagnoses and recommendations for children seen at DAGSY between 2018 and 2022. Through a survey, we obtained feedback from twenty families and eleven referring clinicians. RESULTS: 159 children (mean age 10.2 years, 57.2% males) completed an interdisciplinary (psychiatry, psychology, genetic counselling) DAGSY assessment during this period. Of these, 69.8% had a pathogenic microdeletion or microduplication, 21.5% a sequence-level variant, 4.4% a chromosomal disorder, and 4.4% a variant of unknown significance with emerging evidence of pathogenicity. One in four children did not have a prior NPD diagnosis, and referral to DAGSY was motivated by their genetic vulnerability alone. Following assessment, 76.7% received at least one new NPD diagnosis, most frequently intellectual disability (24.5%), anxiety (20.7%), autism spectrum (18.9%) and specific learning (16.4%) disorder. Both families and clinicians responding to our survey expressed satisfaction, but also highlighted some areas for potential improvement. CONCLUSIONS: DAGSY addresses an unmet clinical need for children identified with genetic variants that confer increased vulnerability for NPD and provides a crucial platform for research in this area. DAGSY can serve as a model for interdisciplinary clinics integrating child psychiatry, psychology and genetics, addressing both clinical and research needs for this emerging population.
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 | 0.024 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.023 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".