ArticleBiological psychiatry2020
Evaluating the Impact of Nonrandom Mating: Psychiatric Outcomes Among the Offspring of Pairs Diagnosed With Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder.
Article in Biological psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrative analysis of genome-wide association studies identifies novel loci associated with neuropsychiatric disorders.Translational psychiatry · 2021Pooled it
- Phenotypic and ancestry-related assortative mating in autism.Molecular autism · 2024Article
- Assortative mating and parental genetic relatedness contribute to the pathogenicity of variably expressive variants.American journal of human genetics · 2023Article
- One versus two biological parents with mental disorders: Relationship to educational attainment in the next generation.Psychological medicine · 2023Article
- 15 years of GWAS discovery: Realizing the promise.American journal of human genetics · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNonrandom mating has been shown for psychiatric diagnoses, with hypothesized-but not quantified-implications for offspring liability. This national cohort study enumerated the incidence of major psychiatric disorders among the offspring of parent pairs affected with schizophrenia (SCZ) and/or bipolar disorder (BIP) (i.e., dual-affected pairs).
methodsParticipants were all Swedish residents alive or born between 1968 and 2013 (n = 4,255,196 unique pairs and 8,343,951 offspring). Offspring with dual-affected, single-affected, and unaffected parents were followed (1973-2013) for incidence of broad psychiatric disorders. Primary outcomes included hazard ratio (HR) and cumulative incidence for SCZ and BIP in the offspring. Additional outcomes included any neuropsychiatric, anxiety, depressive, personality, or substance use disorders. Cumulative incidences of SCZ and BIP were used to inform heritability models for these disorders.
resultsHazards were highest within disorder (e.g., offspring of dual-SCZ pairs had sharply raised hazards for SCZ [HR = 55.3]); however, they were significantly raised for all diagnoses (HR range = 2.89-11.84). Incidences were significantly higher for the majority of outcomes, with 43.4% to 48.5% diagnosed with "any" disorder over follow-up. Risks were retained, with modest attenuations, for the offspring of heterotypic pairs. The estimated heritability of liability for SCZ (h
conclusionsRisks for a broad spectrum of psychiatric diagnoses are significantly raised in the offspring of dual-affected parents, in line with expectations from a polygenic model of liability to disease risk. How these risks may contribute to population maintenance of these disorders is considered.
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.