ReviewCells2023
Congenital Microcephaly: A Debate on Diagnostic Challenges and Etiological Paradigm of the Shift from Isolated/Non-Syndromic to Syndromic Microcephaly.
Review in Cells, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advanced Ophthalmic Drug Delivery in Homocystinuria Type CblC: A Translational Review of Ophthalmic Pathologies and Therapeutic Opportunities.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Rare genetic causes of primary microcephaly in two Saudi families identified via whole-exome sequencing: Genomic and phenotypic delineation of pathogenicMolecular genetics and metabolism reports · 2026Article
- Worm orthologues of cytokinesis-associated proteins CIT and ASPM regulate neuronal microtubule dynamics and polarity in C. elegans.PLoS genetics · 2026Article
- Review
- CETN3 deficiency induces microcephaly by disrupting neural stem/progenitor cell fate through impaired centrosome assembly and RNA splicing.EMBO molecular medicine · 2025Article
- Incidence of congenital microcephaly in the Czech Republic: The effect of maternal age.Journal of applied biomedicine · 2025Article
- Expanding the mutational spectrum of congenital microcephaly in Pakistani families.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- Article
- Small size, big problems: insights and difficulties in prenatal diagnosis of fetal microcephaly.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Review
- Microcephaly, Short Stature, Intellectual Disability, Speech Absence and Cataract Are Associated with Novel Bi-Allelic Missense Variant inChildren (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Transcription factors in microcephaly.Frontiers in neuroscience · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Congenital microcephaly (CM) exhibits broad clinical and genetic heterogeneity and is thus categorized into several subtypes. However, the recent bloom of disease-gene discoveries has revealed more overlaps than differences in the underlying genetic architecture for these clinical sub-categories, complicating the differential diagnosis. Moreover, the mechanism of the paradigm shift from a brain-restricted to a multi-organ phenotype is only vaguely understood. This review article highlights the critical factors considered while defining CM subtypes. It also presents possible arguments on long-standing questions of the brain-specific nature of CM caused by a dysfunction of the ubiquitously expressed proteins. We argue that brain-specific splicing events and organ-restricted protein expression may contribute in part to disparate clinical manifestations. We also highlight the role of genetic modifiers and de novo variants in the multi-organ phenotype of CM and emphasize their consideration in molecular characterization. This review thus attempts to expand our understanding of the phenotypic and etiological variability in CM and invites the development of more comprehensive guidelines.
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.