ArticlePorto biomedical journal
Copy number variations on chromosome 2: impact on human phenotype, a cross-sectional study.
Article in Porto biomedical journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epilepsy and Intellectual Disability in a Boy with a 2q13 Microdeletion Affecting thePediatric reports · 2026Article
- ComplexFrontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Breaking new ground: ExploringInternational journal of health sciencesArticle
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Copy number variations (CNVs) on chromosome 2 are associated with a variety of human diseases particularly neurodevelopmental disorders. Array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) constitutes an added value for the diagnosis of neurodevelopmental or neuropsychiatric diseases. This study aims to establish a genotype-phenotype correlation, reporting CNVs on the chromosome 2, contributing for a better characterization of the molecular significance of rare CNVs in this chromosome. Methods: To accomplish this, a cross-sectional study was performed using genetic information included in a database of the Department of Genetics of the Faculty of Medicine and clinical data from Hospital database. CNVs were classified as pathogenic, benign, variants of unknown significance, and likely pathogenic or likely benign, in accordance with the ACMG Standards and Guidelines. Results: A total of 2897 patients were studied using aCGH, 32 with CNVs on chromosome 2, 24 classified as likely pathogenic, and 8 as pathogenic. Genomic intervals with a higher incidence were one 2p25.3 and 2q13 regions. Conclusions: This study will help to establish new genotype-phenotype correlations, allowing update of databases and literature and the improvement of diagnosis and genetic counseling which could be an added value for prenatal genetic counseling.
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.