MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403553270 · doi:10.3389/fgene.2024.1451746

Case Report: An association of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction with 5p deletions

2024· article· en· W4403553270 on OpenAlexaff
Kira Mascho, Svetlana A. Yatsenko, Cecilia Lo, Xinxiu Xu, Jennifer Johnson, Lindsey R. Helvaty, Stephanie Burns Wechsler, Chaya N. Murali, Seema R. Lalani, Vidu Garg, Jennelle C. Hodge, Kim L. McBride, Stephanie M. Ware, Jiuann‐Huey Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Genetics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsVentricular outflow tract obstructionMedicineHeart defectRetrospective cohort studyOutflowDown syndromeInternal medicineCardiologyHeart disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: 5p deletion syndrome, also called Cri-du-chat syndrome 5p is a rare genetic syndrome with reports up to 36% of patients are associated with congenital heart defects. We investigated the association between left outflow tract obstruction and Cri-du-chat syndrome. Methods: A retrospective review of the abnormal microarray cases with congenital heart defects in Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh and the Cytogenomics of Cardiovascular Malformations Consortium. Results: A retrospective review at nine pediatric centers identified 4 patients with 5p deletions and left outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO). Three of these patients had additional copy number variants. We present data suggesting an association of LVOTO with 5p deletion with high mortality in the presence of additional copy number variants. Conclusion: A rare combination of 5p deletion and left ventricular outflow obstruction was observed in the registry of copy number variants and congenital heart defects.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.211
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in GeneticsSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207