Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 420

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Emerging patterns of cryptic chromosomal imbalance in patients with idiopathic mental retardation and multiple congenital anomalies: a new series of 140 patients and review of published reports

Open access
Menten, B, Maas, N, Thienpont, B, Buysse, K, Vandesompele, J, Melotte, C, de Ravel, T, Van Vooren, S, Balikova, I, Backx, L, Janssens, S, De Paepe, A, De Moor, B, Moreau, Y, Marynen, P, Fryns, J-P, Mortier, G, Devriendt, K, Speleman, F, Vermeesch, J R·2006·Journal of Medical Genetics

Abstract

Background: Chromosomal abnormalities are a major cause of mental retardation and multiple congenital anomalies (MCA/MR). Screening for these chromosomal imbalances has mainly been done by standard karyotyping. Previous array CGH studies on selected patients with chromosomal phenotypes and normal karyotypes suggested an incidence of 10–15% of previously unnoticed de novo chromosomal imbalances. Objective: To report array CGH screening of a series of 140 patients (the largest published so far) with idiopathic MCA/MR but normal karyotype. Results: Submicroscopic chromosomal imbalances were detected in 28 of the 140 patients (20%) and included 18 deletions, seven duplications, and three unbalanced translocations. Seventeen of 24 imbalances were confirmed de novo and 19 were assumed to be causal. Excluding subtelomeric imbalances, our study identified 11 clinically relevant interstitial submicroscopic imbalances (8%). Taking this and previously reported studies into consideration, array CGH screening with a resolution of at least 1 Mb has been undertaken on 432 patients with MCA/MR. Most imbalances are non-recurrent and spread across the genome. In at least 8.8% of these patients (38 of 432) de novo intrachromosomal alterations have been identified. Conclusions: Array CGH should be considered an essential aspect of the genetic analysis of patients with MCA/MR. In addition, in the present study three patients were mosaic for a structural chromosome rearrangement. One of these patients had monosomy 7 in as few as 8% of the cells, showing that array CGH allows detection of low grade mosaicisims.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jmg.2005.039453

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 28 references

Cited by

See all 420

Metadata

Authors
Menten, B., Maas, N., Thienpont, B., Buysse, K., Vandesompele, J., Melotte, C., de Ravel, T., Van Vooren, S., Balikova, I., Backx, L., Janssens, S., De Paepe, A., De Moor, B., Moreau, Y., Marynen, P., Fryns, J.-P., Mortier, G., Devriendt, K., Speleman, F., & Vermeesch, J. R.
Venue
Journal of Medical Genetics
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2006-02-20
Volume
43
Issue
8
Pages
625-633
ISSN
  • 0022-2593 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-6244
OpenAlex
W2101446132
Cited by
420
References
28
FWCI
32.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Emerging patterns of cryptic chromosomal imbalance in patients with idiopathic mental retardation and multiple congenital anomalies: a new series of 140 patients and review of published reports. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jmg.2005.039453
The paper
Menten, B., Maas, N., Thienpont, B., Buysse, K., Vandesompele, J., Melotte, C., de Ravel, T., Van Vooren, S., Balikova, I., Backx, L., Janssens, S., De Paepe, A., De Moor, B., Moreau, Y., Marynen, P., Fryns, J.-P., Mortier, G., Devriendt, K., Speleman, F., & Vermeesch, J. R. (2006). Emerging patterns of cryptic chromosomal imbalance in patients with idiopathic mental retardation and multiple congenital anomalies: a new series of 140 patients and review of published reports. Journal of Medical Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.2005.039453

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.