Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15260947›Full record

ReviewCurrent psychiatry reports2004

The genes for schizophrenia: finally a breakthrough?

Brian H Shirts, Vishwajit Nimgaonkar

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current psychiatry reports, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Functional MRI at the crossroads.International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology · 2009
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. How a neuropsychiatric brain bank should be run: a consensus paper of Brainnet Europe II.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2007
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
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 2 countries.

Brian H ShirtsWestern Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, Room 443, 3811 O"Hara Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.
Vishwajit Nimgaonkar
University of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A number of susceptibility genes for schizophrenia have recently been identified. They have engendered excitement because replicate studies have attained greater consistency than in the past. In this review, we outline gene mapping methods, and briefly review their strengths and challenges. We also evaluate peer-reviewed genetic association studies that have implicated six selected genes: catechol-O-methyl transferase (COMT), neuregulin 1 (NRG1), dysbindin (DTNBP1), regulator of G-protein signaling 4 (RGS4), and G72 and D-amino-acid oxidase (DAAO). The available supporting evidence is variable. Though credible evidence is available for all of these genes, it is strongest for NRG1 and DTNBP1. Further studies, particularly exhaustive analyses of all polymorphisms at each locus, meta-analyses, and investigations of the likely function of risk alleles (variants) are desirable.

Indexed as

Carrier ProteinsCatechol O-MethyltransferaseDysbindinDystrophin-Associated ProteinsGene ExpressionGenetic LinkageGTP-Binding Protein RegulatorsHumansNeuregulin-1SchizophreniaCarrier ProteinsCatechol O-MethyltransferaseDTNBP1 protein, humanDysbindinDystrophin-Associated ProteinsGTP-Binding Protein RegulatorsNeuregulin-1

Identifiers

PMID15260947
OpenAlexW2127215041

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.