ArticleActa naturae2014
Williams syndrome as a model for elucidation of the pathway genes - the brain - cognitive functions: genetics and epigenetics.
Article in Acta naturae, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developmental characteristics of Williams-Beuren syndrome and evaluation of adaptive behavioral skills.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2023Article
- Chromatin Structure and "DNA Sequence View": The Role of Satellite DNA in Ectopic Pairing of theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Article
- Report on the 13th symposium on invertebrate neurobiology held 26-30 August 2015 at the Balaton Limnological Institute, MTA Centre for ecological research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Tihany, Hungary.Invertebrate neuroscience : IN · 2016Article
- Array CGH - A Powerful Tool in Molecular Diagnostic of Pathogenic Microdeletions - Williams-Beuren Syndrome - A Case Report.Current health sciences journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genomic diseases or syndromes with multiple manifestations arise spontaneously and unpredictably as a result of contiguous deletions and duplications generated by unequal recombination in chromosomal regions with a specific architecture. The Williams syndrome is believed to be one of the most attractive models for linking genes, the brain, behavior and cognitive functions. It is a neurogenetic disorder resulting from a 1.5 Mb deletion at 7q11.23 which covers more than 20 genes; the hemizigosity of these genes leads to multiple manifestations, with the behavioral ones comprising three distinct domains: 1) visuo-spatial orientation; 2) verbal and linguistic defect; and 3) hypersocialisation. The shortest observed deletion leads to hemizigosity in only two genes: eln and limk1. Therefore, the first gene is supposed to be responsible for cardiovascular pathology; and the second one, for cognitive pathology. Since cognitive pathology diminishes with a patient's age, the original idea of the crucial role of genes straightforwardly determining the brain's morphology and behavior was substituted by ideas of the brain's plasticity and the necessity of finding epigenetic factors that affect brain development and the functions manifested as behavioral changes. Recently, non-coding microRNAs (miRs) began to be considered as the main players in these epigenetic events. This review tackles the following problems: is it possible to develop relatively simple model systems to analyze the contribution of both a single gene and the consequences of its epigenetic regulation in the formation of the Williams syndrome's cognitive phenotype? Is it possible to use Drosophila as a simple model system?
Indexed as
Identifiers
24772323PMC3999462W2130748498What 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.