Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15020472›Full record

ArticleGenetics2004

Molecular and comparative genetics of mental retardation.

Jennifer K Inlow, Linda L Restifo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 94 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
94citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

94 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 251 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. A Novel Loss-of-FunctionInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Assessing Relevance of External Cognitive Measures.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2017
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

34 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jennifer K InlowArizona Research Laboratories Division of Neurobiology, University of Arizona, Tucson 85721-0077, USA.
Linda L Restifo
University of Arizona · US

Funding

NEURAL DEVELOPMENT--INTERCELLULAR AND HUMORAL CONTROLP01NS028495 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI LEVINE, RICHARD B · 1990 to 2005
$5.9M
NINDS NIH HHS P01 NS028495
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Affecting 1-3% of the population, mental retardation (MR) poses significant challenges for clinicians and scientists. Understanding the biology of MR is complicated by the extraordinary heterogeneity of genetic MR disorders. Detailed analyses of >1000 Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM) database entries and literature searches through September 2003 revealed 282 molecularly identified MR genes. We estimate that hundreds more MR genes remain to be identified. A novel test, in which we distributed unmapped MR disorders proportionately across the autosomes, failed to eliminate the well-known X-chromosome overrepresentation of MR genes and candidate genes. This evidence argues against ascertainment bias as the main cause of the skewed distribution. On the basis of a synthesis of clinical and laboratory data, we developed a biological functions classification scheme for MR genes. Metabolic pathways, signaling pathways, and transcription are the most common functions, but numerous other aspects of neuronal and glial biology are controlled by MR genes as well. Using protein sequence and domain-organization comparisons, we found a striking conservation of MR genes and genetic pathways across the approximately 700 million years that separate Homo sapiens and Drosophila melanogaster. Eighty-seven percent have one or more fruit fly homologs and 76% have at least one candidate functional ortholog. We propose that D. melanogaster can be used in a systematic manner to study MR and possibly to develop bioassays for therapeutic drug discovery. We selected 42 Drosophila orthologs as most likely to reveal molecular and cellular mechanisms of nervous system development or plasticity relevant to MR.

Indexed as

Sequence HomologyAnimalsChromosome MappingComputational BiologyDatabases, GeneticDrosophila melanogasterHumansIntellectual DisabilitySequence Analysis, DNATerminology as TopicX-Linked Intellectual Disability

Identifiers

PMID15020472
PMCPMC1470723
OpenAlexW2132082846

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.