FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2000503382> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2000503382 endingPage "158" @default.
• W2000503382 startingPage "157" @default.
• W2000503382 abstract "We thank Prof ten Kate et al1 for the useful observations, which will allow us to clarify some aspects of the HI method.2, 3With regard to the inclusion of mutations with relative frequency below 1% in the formula, we may notice how these negligibly affect the final result, with a gene frequency increasing from 1.90 to 1.95%. This corresponds to an even smaller increase in the prevalence of the disease (from 3.65 × 10−4 to 3.8 × 10−4, if we assume P=q2 to simplify).With reference to the exclusion of heterozygous patients from the formula, this is a conservative choice that we made under the basic assumption of strict recessive inheritance in the model, as including them would mean to (erroneously) assume that they are all compound heterozygotes. We also underline that, in this specific study, every sample was first investigated for the six most common reported mutations in Sardinia, and then, if no mutation was found, by single-strand conformation polymorphisms and Sanger sequencing of all exons and of the flanking intronic regions in the ATP7B gene. This makes it highly unlikely that a mutation already found in the Sardinian population was undetected.Finally, we agree that in a non-random mating population q→P (instead of P=q2, as per Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium). However, the current Sardinian population is characterized by high endogamy more than by high frequency of consanguineous matings. Under this scenario, also known as ‘random inbreeding',4 the chance that an individual will mate with a genetically related one will be higher, and will finally lead to P≈q2, as already discussed in a recent letter published in this Journal.5Nonetheless, we acknowledge that this is an unavoidable approximation and we always mentioned the gene frequency (q) of a recessive disorder instead of the Prevalence (P) as the main output of the HI method, inferring P only when required for a comparison with other epidemiological methods.2, 3In summary, we agree with ten Kate et al1 that all of these details only slightly affect the final result but we disagree that they will jointly create a big discrepancy between our q estimate and the real one, as also demonstrated by the factual equivalence between our q and the one estimated by Zappu et al6 through a classical and reliable neonatal molecular screening. What is more important, the main purpose of the HI method is not to make a precise inference of the prevalence of a given recessive disorder in a population (as variables like the inbreeding coefficient can still be a source of error), but to produce ‘a ranking order of the prevalence of autosomal recessive disorders, thus establishing priorities for genetic testing at the population level'.2, 3Our wish is that the HI method becomes of common use by public health institutions, especially in those country characterized by highly endogamous/consanguineous populations, and that it can be improved by making use of precise estimates of the inbreeding coefficient based on the analysis of genomic patterns of homozygosity.7" @default.
• W2000503382 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2000503382 creator A5011953010 @default.
• W2000503382 creator A5068432859 @default.
• W2000503382 creator A5088443108 @default.
• W2000503382 date "2013-07-17" @default.
• W2000503382 modified "2023-10-08" @default.
• W2000503382 title "Reply to ten Kate et al" @default.
• W2000503382 cites W1541288976 @default.
• W2000503382 cites W1776751911 @default.
• W2000503382 cites W1973342963 @default.
• W2000503382 cites W2141798524 @default.
• W2000503382 cites W2148519154 @default.
• W2000503382 cites W2162651642 @default.
• W2000503382 doi "https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2013.153" @default.
• W2000503382 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/3895652" @default.
• W2000503382 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23860043" @default.
• W2000503382 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
• W2000503382 type Work @default.
• W2000503382 sameAs 2000503382 @default.
• W2000503382 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2000503382 countsByYear W20005033822017 @default.
• W2000503382 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2000503382 hasAuthorship W2000503382A5011953010 @default.
• W2000503382 hasAuthorship W2000503382A5068432859 @default.
• W2000503382 hasAuthorship W2000503382A5088443108 @default.
• W2000503382 hasBestOaLocation W20005033821 @default.
• W2000503382 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W2000503382 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2000503382 hasConceptScore W2000503382C54355233 @default.
• W2000503382 hasConceptScore W2000503382C86803240 @default.
• W2000503382 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2000503382 hasLocation W20005033821 @default.
• W2000503382 hasLocation W20005033822 @default.
• W2000503382 hasLocation W20005033823 @default.
• W2000503382 hasLocation W20005033824 @default.
• W2000503382 hasLocation W20005033825 @default.
• W2000503382 hasOpenAccess W2000503382 @default.
• W2000503382 hasPrimaryLocation W20005033821 @default.
• W2000503382 hasRelatedWork W1920751942 @default.
• W2000503382 hasRelatedWork W1990804418 @default.
• W2000503382 hasRelatedWork W1991523530 @default.
• W2000503382 hasRelatedWork W2002128513 @default.
• W2000503382 hasRelatedWork W2020824267 @default.
• W2000503382 hasRelatedWork W2031436818 @default.
• W2000503382 hasRelatedWork W2057739827 @default.
• W2000503382 hasRelatedWork W2075354549 @default.
• W2000503382 hasRelatedWork W2082860237 @default.
• W2000503382 hasRelatedWork W2092874662 @default.
• W2000503382 hasVolume "22" @default.
• W2000503382 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2000503382 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2000503382 magId "2000503382" @default.
• W2000503382 workType "article" @default.