Bringing genetics back to psychiatric endophenotypes.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Translating neurophysiological biomarkers into clinical tools: A psychometric blueprint illustrated with the error-related negativity.The American psychologist · 2025
   Review
2. From pharmacogenetics to pharmacogenomics: the way toward the personalization of antidepressant treatment.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2014
   Review
3. Sensitive periods in epigenetics: bringing us closer to complex behavioral phenotypes.Epigenomics · 2012
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  High dimensional endophenotype ranking in the search for major depression risk genes.2012

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as