ReviewEpilepsia2008
Evaluating candidate genes in common epilepsies and the nature of evidence.
Review in Epilepsia, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Credibility of genetic predictors for antiepileptic drug resistance: A systematic Bayesian reappraisal of published meta-analyses.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Genetic susceptibility in Juvenile Myoclonic Epilepsy: Systematic review of genetic association studies.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Revealing a brain network endophenotype in families with idiopathic generalised epilepsy.PloS one · 2014Article
- Article
- Genetic evaluation and counseling for epilepsy.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2010Review
- Multiple subsampling of dense SNP data localizes disease genes with increased precision.Human heredity · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Very few genetic associations for idiopathic epilepsy have been replicated and this has tempered enthusiasm for the results of genetic studies in epilepsy. What are the reasons for lack of replication? While type 1 error, population stratification, and multiple testing have been discussed extensively, the importance of genetic heterogeneity has been relatively neglected. In the first part of this review, we explore the sources of genetic heterogeneity and their importance for epilepsy genetic studies. In the second part, we review alternatives to the simple law of replication, revisiting Bradford Hill's guidelines for evidence of causality. A coherence perspective is applied to three examples. We conclude that adopting the perspective of integrating coherent and consistent evidence from different experimental approaches is a more appropriate requirement for proceeding to functional studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.