Association of two polymorphisms rs3749117 and rs3749119 in PLA2R1 with idiopathic membranous nephropathy:A Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the relationship between two types of single nucleotide polymorphism（SNP）and idiopathic membranous nephropathy（IMN）.Methods A systematic search was performed in English databases of PubMed and Embase and Chinese databases of CNKI,WanFang and China Biology Medicine（CBM）on the susceptibility of rs3749117 and rs3749119 to IMN respectively.Odds ratio（OR）and 95% confidence interval（95%CI）were selected as the effect sizes.Through careful and rigorous preliminary screening and re-screening of the literature, the matching literatures were retrieved and Newcastle-Ottawa scale was utilized for literature evaluations.Then the relevant data were extracted and processed for Meta-analysis.Results Finally a total of 7 case-control studies were included.Six sets of original data examined the correlation between SNP rs3749117 and IMN susceptibility, including 1750 cases in case group and 1593 cases in control group.Through the analysis of 5 genetic models, rs3749117 was correlated with the susceptibility of Asian IMN.Based upon the eligible studies, the pathogenic gene was T [C/T:OR=0.528,95%CI（0.372-0.749）,P<0.001].The relationship existed between SNP rs3749119 and IMN susceptibility.Meta-analysis indicated that a significant correlation existed between rs3749119 and Asian IMN susceptibility.Also based upon current researches, gene C might be a pathogenic gene[C/T,OR=2.019（1.405-2.903）,P<0.001].Conclusion A distinct correlation exists between rs3749119/rs3749117 and Asian IMN susceptibility.And the pathogenic genes of rs3749119 and rs3749117 are C and T respectively.
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 | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.044 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".