Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29183409›Full record

ArticlePsychological medicine2018

Genetic risk of major depressive disorder: the moderating and mediating effects of neuroticism and psychological resilience on clinical and self-reported depression.

L B Navrady, M J Adams, S W Y Chan, Major Depressive Disorder Working Group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, S J Ritchie, A M McIntosh

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

L B NavradyDivision of Psychiatry, University of Edinburgh, Royal Edinburgh Hospital, Edinburgh EH10 5HF, UK.
M J AdamsDivision of Psychiatry, University of Edinburgh, Royal Edinburgh Hospital, Edinburgh EH10 5HF, UK.
S W Y ChanSection of Clinical Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Medical Quad, Teviot Place, Edinburgh EH8 9AG, UK.
Major Depressive Disorder Working Group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium
S J RitchieDepartment of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, 7 George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9JZ, UK.
A M McIntoshDivision of Psychiatry, University of Edinburgh, Royal Edinburgh Hospital, Edinburgh EH10 5HF, UK.
University of Edinburgh · GBRoyal Edinburgh Hospital · GB

Funding

3/7 Psychiatric Genomics Consortium: Finding actionable variationU01MH109536 · NIMH · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI CHARNEY, ALEXANDER W, HUCKINS, LAURA MARIANNE · 2016 to 2020
$2.7M
Chief Scientist Office [UK] CZD/16/6Medical Research Council MR/K026992/1NIMH NIH HHS U01 MH109536Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 104036/Z/14/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPolygenic risk scores (PRS) for depression correlate with depression status and chronicity, and provide causal anchors to identify depressive mechanisms. Neuroticism is phenotypically and genetically positively associated with depression, whereas psychological resilience demonstrates negative phenotypic associations. Whether increased neuroticism and reduced resilience are downstream mediators of genetic risk for depression, and whether they contribute independently to risk remains unknown.

methodsModerating and mediating relationships between depression PRS, neuroticism, resilience and both clinical and self-reported depression were examined in a large, population-based cohort, Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study (N = 4166), using linear regression and structural equation modelling. Neuroticism and resilience were measured by the Eysenck Personality Scale Short Form Revised and the Brief Resilience Scale, respectively.

resultsPRS for depression was associated with increased likelihood of self-reported and clinical depression. No interaction was found between PRS and neuroticism, or between PRS and resilience. Neuroticism was associated with increased likelihood of self-reported and clinical depression, whereas resilience was associated with reduced risk. Structural equation modelling suggested the association between PRS and self-reported and clinical depression was mediated by neuroticism (43-57%), while resilience mediated the association in the opposite direction (37-40%). For both self-reported and clinical diagnoses, the genetic risk for depression was independently mediated by neuroticism and resilience.

conclusionsFindings suggest polygenic risk for depression increases vulnerability for self-reported and clinical depression through independent effects on increased neuroticism and reduced psychological resilience. In addition, two partially independent mechanisms - neuroticism and resilience - may form part of the pathway of vulnerability to depression.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseNeuroticismResilience, PsychologicalAdultFemaleHumansMajor Depressive DisorderMaleMultifactorial InheritanceRiskScotlandSelf Reportdepressiongeneration Scotlandmediationmoderationneuroticismpolygenic riskresilience

Identifiers

PMID29183409
PMCPMC6088772
OpenAlexW2884339004

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.