Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32952419›Full record

ArticleNoro psikiyatri arsivi2020

Chromosomal Microarray Analysis in Turkish Patients with Unexplained Developmental Delay and Intellectual Developmental Disorders.

Hakan Gürkan, Emine İkbal Atli, Engin Atli, Leyla Bozatli, Mengühan Araz Altay, Sinem Yalçintepe, Yasemin Özen, Damla Eker, Çisem Akurut, Selma Demır and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Noro psikiyatri arsivi, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hakan GürkanFaculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Genetics, Edirne, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Emine İkbal AtliFaculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Genetics, Edirne, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Engin AtliFaculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Genetics, Edirne, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Leyla BozatliFaculty of Medicine, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Mengühan Araz AltayFaculty of Medicine, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Sinem YalçintepeFaculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Genetics, Edirne, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Yasemin ÖzenFaculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Genetics, Edirne, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Damla EkerFaculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Genetics, Edirne, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Çisem AkurutFaculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Genetics, Edirne, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Selma DemırFaculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Genetics, Edirne, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Işık GörkerFaculty of Medicine, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Trakya University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAneuploids, copy number variations (CNVs), and single nucleotide variants in specific genes are the main genetic causes of developmental delay (DD) and intellectual disability disorder (IDD). These genetic changes can be detected using chromosome analysis, chromosomal microarray (CMA), and next-generation DNA sequencing techniques. Therefore; In this study, we aimed to investigate the importance of CMA in determining the genomic etiology of unexplained DD and IDD in 123 patients.

methodFor 123 patients, chromosome analysis, DNA fragment analysis and microarray were performed. Conventional G-band karyotype analysis from peripheral blood was performed as part of the initial screening tests. FMR1 gene CGG repeat number and methylation analysis were carried out to exclude fragile X syndrome.

resultsCMA analysis was performed in 123 unexplained IDD/DD patients with normal karyotypes and fragile X screening, which were evaluated by conventional cytogenetics. Forty-four CNVs were detected in 39 (39/123=31.7%) patients. Twelve CNV variant of unknown significance (VUS) (9.75%) patients and 7 CNV benign (5.69%) patients were reported. In 6 patients, one or more pathogenic CNVs were determined. Therefore, the diagnostic efficiency of CMA was found to be 31.7% (39/123).

conclusionToday, genetic analysis is still not part of the routine in the evaluation of IDD patients who present to psychiatry clinics. A genetic diagnosis from CMA can eliminate genetic question marks and thus alter the clinical management of patients. Approximately one-third of the positive CMA findings are clinically intervenable. However, the emergence of CNVs as important risk factors for multiple disorders increases the need for individuals with comorbid neurodevelopmental conditions to be the priority where the CMA test is recommended.

Indexed as

chromosomal microarrayCopy number variationsdevelopmental delaygenetic testingintellectual developmental disordermental retardation

Identifiers

PMID32952419
PMCPMC7481981
OpenAlexW3011751239

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.