17q12, explained for kidsdeletion syndrome · static snapshot
Everything here was found on the internet and put together with help from a computer program that reads and writes (AI). It is here so you can learn — it is not the final word. Always check the real source. Read the whole notice
A number from a study What it can look like 1 supporting source confidence 97% novelty 60%

Statistical analyses We calculated prevalence rates with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for generalized and abd

A source reports “95%” in the context of growth nutrition: “Statistical analyses We calculated prevalence rates with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for generalized and abdominal obesity, and MetS, using the normal distribution approximation (Wald interval) formula; CI = ρ ± 1.96 * ρ ( 1 − ρ ) n .”

How this was derived

Numbers are quoted verbatim from the source; check the source before quoting onward.

Generated 2026-11-13, last changed today. Dedup key freq:95%. The engine re-checks this insight on every analysis run; if more sources agree, its corroboration and confidence go up and it reappears as “new”.

Evidence (3 quotes)

The study reported an overall inverse association between DM and ALS (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.80), with a protective effect of DM above 61 years (at 65 years old OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.50-0.85) and a non-significant increased risk below 51 years (at 35 years old OR 1.68, 95% CI 0.75-3.75).
Statistical analyses We calculated prevalence rates with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for generalized and abdominal obesity, and MetS, using the normal distribution approximation (Wald interval) formula; CI = ρ ± 1.96 * ρ ( 1 − ρ ) n .

Supporting documents (3)