Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19047715›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume2008

Polygenic threshold model with sex dimorphism in clubfoot inheritance: the Carter effect.

Lisa M Kruse, Matthew B Dobbs, Christina A Gurnett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Association of Polymorphism in Locus of rs274503 (Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Incidence of Congenital Clubfoot: Preliminary Data from Italian CeDAP Registry.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

3 authors.

Lisa M KruseDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8111, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Matthew B Dobbs
Christina A Gurnett

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIdiopathic clubfoot is approximately twice as common in males than in females. The reason for this discrepancy is unclear but may represent an inherent difference in the susceptibility to the deformity. If this difference is due to genetic factors it is predicted that in order to inherit clubfoot, females need to have a greater number of susceptibility genes than males. Females would also be more likely to transmit the disease to their children and have siblings with clubfoot. This phenomenon is known as the Carter effect, and the presence of such an effect supports a multifactorial threshold model of inheritance.

methodsNinety-seven multiplex families with more than one individual with idiopathic clubfoot were studied. The study included 1093 individuals: 291 with clubfoot and 802 unaffected relatives. Rates of transmission by the thirty-seven affected fathers and twenty-six affected mothers were calculated, and the prevalence among siblings was determined in the nuclear families of affected persons.

resultsWithin these multiplex families, the prevalence of clubfoot was lowest in daughters of affected fathers (eight of twenty-four) and highest in sons of affected mothers (eleven of thirteen). Affected mothers transmitted clubfoot to 59% of their children (nineteen of thirty-two children), whereas affected fathers transmitted idiopathic clubfoot to 37% of their children (twenty-six of seventy children) (p = 0.04). Siblings of an affected female also had a significantly higher prevalence of clubfoot than siblings of an affected male (46% [fifty-four of 117] compared with 34% [sixty-seven of 197]; p = 0.03).

conclusionsThis study demonstrates the presence of the Carter effect in idiopathic clubfoot. This effect can be explained by a polygenic inheritance of clubfoot, with females requiring a greater genetic load to be affected.

Indexed as

ClubfootCohort StudiesFemaleGenetic LoadGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMaleMultifactorial InheritancePedigreePrevalenceRetrospective StudiesSex Distribution

Identifiers

PMID19047715
PMCPMC2663333

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.