ArticleMolecular psychiatry2026
Associations of polygenic risk scores for major depression and depression severity: an investigation of 105 623 individuals with 16 years follow-up.
Article in Molecular psychiatry, 2026. 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.
- Polygenic scores in psychiatric research and clinical practice.Medizinische Genetik : Mitteilungsblatt des Berufsverbandes Medizinische Genetik e.V · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genetic risk could be informative for identifying individuals at risk of depression with severe outcomes. With the novel approach of combined health care registries and self-report measures related to depression, the authors aimed to identify the impact of polygenic risk scores (PRS) for major depression on self report measures and a diagnosis of depression across diagnostic thresholds. The study sample comprised participants from the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study with linked information of depression diagnoses during 2006-2022 from health registries. Linear and logistic models were used to estimate the associations between PRS for major depression and self-reported measures related to depression (Symptom Checklist- 5, Satisfaction With Life Scale, Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale), and a diagnosis of depression. Analyses were performed in groups stratified by level of depression severity defined by registrations in primary and specialist health care. Among the 105 623 individuals included in the study, mean (SD) age was 33.9 (5.3) and 58.5% were female. The associations between PRS for major depression and Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale were more prominent in individuals with a history of inpatient status compared to outpatient status (β = 0.095, cluster robust 95% CI 0.029-0.162; P = 0.005) and status of primary care (β = 0.098, cluster robust 95% CI 0.035-0.160; P = 0.002). PRS for major depression were associated with a diagnosis of depression in all groups of depression severity, with highest effect sizes for more severe types (history of inpatient status: OR = 1.85, cluster robust 95% CI 1.75-1.94; P < 0.01). The results provide new knowledge of how PRS for major depression vary with depression severity.
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.