SynthesisNeuroscience and biobehavioral reviews2019
DNA methylation studies of depression with onset in the peripartum: A critical systematic review.
Synthesis in Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveMajor depression with peripartum onset (MDP) has been associated with multiple adverse offspring health outcomes. The biological mechanisms underlying this relationship remain unclear, but DNA methylation (DNAm) represents a plausible mechanism for mediating MDP exposures and changes in offspring development, behavior, and health. Advances in DNAm research necessitate reevaluating the MDP-DNAm literature to determine how well past studies conform with current best practices.
methodFive databases were searched to identify studies of prenatal-onset MDP and DNAm. Quality scores were assigned to each article independently by two raters using a novel scale specific for MDP-DNAm research.
resultsNineteen studies met inclusion criteria. Quality scores ranged from 10 to 17 out of 24 points (M = 12.8; SD = 1.9), with higher scores indicating increased study rigor. Poor covariate reporting was the most significant contributor to lower scores.
conclusionNo longitudinal MDP-DNAm studies exist. Earlier MDP-DNAm studies should be interpreted with caution, and future research must commit to sharing methodology and data to facilitate cross-study comparisons and maximize dataset utility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.