Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30738374›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2019

Cortical thickness and surface area as an endophenotype in bipolar disorder type I patients and their first-degree relatives.

Nefize Yalin, Aybala Saricicek, Ceren Hidiroglu, Andre Zugman, Nese Direk, Emel Ada, Berrin Cavusoglu, Ayşe Er, Gizem Isik, Deniz Ceylan and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. The Risk for Schizophrenia-Bipolar Spectrum: Does the Apple Fall Close to the Tree? A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Evaluating endophenotypes for bipolar disorder.International journal of bipolar disorders · 2021
    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

13 authors.

Nefize YalinCentre for Affective Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK; Department of Neuroscience, Institute of Health Sciences, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey. Electronic address: nefize.yalin@kcl.ac.uk.
Aybala SaricicekDepartment of Neuroscience, Institute of Health Sciences, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey; Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Turkey.
Ceren HidirogluDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.
Andre ZugmanInterdisciplinary Laboratory of Clinical Neuroscience (LINC), Department of Psychiatry, Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Nese DirekDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.
Emel AdaDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.
Berrin CavusogluDepartment of Neuroscience, Institute of Health Sciences, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.
Ayşe ErDepartment of Neuroscience, Institute of Health Sciences, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.
Gizem IsikDepartment of Neuroscience, Institute of Health Sciences, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.
Deniz CeylanDepartment of Neuroscience, Institute of Health Sciences, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.
Zeliha TuncaDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.
Matthew J KemptonDepartment of Psychosis Studies, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK; Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Aysegul OzerdemDepartment of Neuroscience, Institute of Health Sciences, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey; Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesSo far, few studies have investigated cortical thickness (CT) and surface area (SA) measures in bipolar disorder type I (BDI) in comparison to a high genetic risk group such as first-degree relatives (FR). This study aimed to examine CT and SA differences between BDI, FR and healthy controls (HC).

methods3D T1 magnetic resonance images were acquired from 27 euthymic BDI patients, 24 unaffected FR and 29 HC. CT and SA measures were obtained with FreeSurfer version 5.3.0. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare CT and SA between groups. Group comparisons were repeated with restricting the FR group to 17 siblings (FR-SB) only.

results\Mean age in years was 36.3 ± 9.5 for BDI, 32.1 ± 10.9 for FR, 34.7 ± 9.8 for FR-SB and 33.1 ± 9.0 for HC group respectively. BDI patients revealed larger SA of left pars triangularis (LPT) compared to HC (p = .001). In addition, increased SA in superior temporal cortex (STC) in FR-SB group compared to HC was identified (p = .0001).

conclusionsOur result of increased SA in LPT of BDI could be a disease marker and increased SA in STC of FR-SB could be a marker related with resilience to illness.

Indexed as

EndophenotypesAdultBiomarkersBipolar DisorderCerebral CortexFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeuroimagingSiblingsYoung AdultBiomarkersBipolar disorder type ICortical thicknessEndophenotypeFirst-degree relativeSurface area

Identifiers

PMID30738374
PMCPMC6370861

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.