ArticleDevelopmental medicine and child neurology2026
Clinical and genetic characterization of intellectual disability.
Article in Developmental medicine and child neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical and genetic characterization of intellectual disability.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2026Article
- Lessons from clinical and genetic characterization of intellectual disability.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo examine the clinical and genetic characteristics of intellectual disability.
methodWe conducted a population-based retrospective analysis on the clinical and genetic data of 959 children with diagnosed intellectual disability during a 5-year period (2017-2021) at Oulu University Hospital, Finland.
resultsPathogenic or likely pathogenic gene variants were detected in 89 of 194 patients (46%) who underwent exome sequencing. Chromosomal abnormalities, including those with low penetrance, were observed in 106 of 530 patients (20%) who underwent chromosomal microarray testing. Chromosomal abnormalities and causative gene variants were more frequently identified in patients with moderate to profound intellectual disability than in those with mild intellectual disability; however, this difference was not significant in the diagnostic yield analysis. Epilepsy, congenital heart disease, hearing loss, ophthalmological abnormalities, and autism spectrum disorder were more common among patients with moderate to profound intellectual disability, whereas attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder was associated with mild intellectual disability. Chromosomal abnormalities were associated with congenital heart disease and hearing loss, while pathogenic gene variants were associated with epilepsy and ophthalmological abnormalities.
interpretationSomatic comorbidities were more common in moderate to profound intellectual disability, whereas attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder was more frequent in mild intellectual disability.
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.