Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22878161›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in neurobiology2013

Candidate and non-candidate genes in behavior genetics.

Jonathan Flint, Marcus R Munafò

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in neurobiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Influence BetweenAIDS research and human retroviruses · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Power-up: A Reanalysis of 'Power Failure' in Neuroscience Using Mixture Modeling.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2017
    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.

Jonathan FlintWellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. jf@well.ox.ac.uk
Marcus R Munafò

Funding

Wellcome Trust 090532
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this review we discuss recent developments in psychiatric genetics: on the one hand, studies using whole genome approaches (genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and exome sequencing) are coming close to finding genes and molecular variants that contribute to disease susceptibility; on the other candidate genes, such as the serotonin transporter, continue to dominate in genetic studies of brain imaging phenotypes and in protracted searches for gene by environment interactions. These two areas intersect, in that new information about genetic effects from whole genome approaches, should (but does not always) inform the single locus analyses.

Indexed as

BehaviorGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenome-Wide Association StudyHumansMental Disorders

Identifiers

PMID22878161
PMCPMC3752971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.