ReviewMolecular psychiatry2025
Defining suicidality phenotypes for genetic studies: perspectives of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium Suicide Working Group.
Review in Molecular psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Genomic Studies of Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviors in Latin American Populations: A Systematic Review.Biological psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- MicroRNAs and suicidality: a systematic review and bioinformatic evaluation.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Network analysis of the genetic relationships between twenty psychiatric and substance use disorders.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026Article
- Mapping the genetic landscape of suicide risk: Insights from genomic SEM.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026Article
- Genome-wide association studies identify 77 loci for suicidality and provide novel biological insights.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
36 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Suicidality phenotypes, consisting of suicidal ideation (SI), suicide attempt (SA), and suicide death (SD), are all heritable but present unique challenges in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) due to their individual complexity, overlap with each other and with related self-harm phenotypes, and varying associations with psychiatric disorders. GWAS have uncovered several loci associated with suicidality phenotypes by meta-analyzing data from multiple cohorts. However, combining datasets from many research groups, where each group may use different study designs, phenotyping instruments, and definitions of suicidality phenotypes, presents challenges. Heterogeneity resulting from these differences can limit genetic discovery; harmonizing phenotype definitions to ensure consistency will greatly improve results. Here, we describe a standardized phenotyping protocol that draws on the expertise of a subgroup of clinicians, researchers, and experts from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium Suicide Working Group to propose consensus definitions for SI, SA, and SD for genetic studies.
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.