Suggestive evidence for linkage of ADHD features in bipolar disorder to chromosome 10p14
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Higher rates of bipolar disorder amongst the first-degree relatives of probands with ADHD, and increased rates of ADHD in the relatives of bipolar probands have been reported in many studies. This suggests some commonality in the genetic basis for bipolar disorder and ADHD. We hypothesized that ADHD symptoms in bipolar disorder may access a quantitative subphenotype that is genetically less complex and therefore advantageous for mapping studies. The Wender Utah Rating Scale (WURS) was used to quantify ADHD features in 57 bipolar families collected for linkage studies. The factor structure of the WURS was first examined, and heritability was estimated. Linkage analysis was then conducted using the WURS total score and factor scores as quantitative traits. Three factors were identified: impulsivity and defiant behavior, mood instability and anxiety, and inattention. The total WURS and factor scores were each significantly heritable (0.34 <h(2r) < 0.49) in bipolar families. The inattention factor obtained maximum evidence of linkage on chromosome 10p14 (LOD = 3.35, 25 cM). A LOD score of 2.06 for the total WURS score was found on chromosome 12q24 region. Childhood ADHD features in patients with bipolar disorder are heritable and may represent a genetically distinct dimension of illness. 10p14, in particular may contain a locus for inattention in bipolar disorder. Quantitative dimensional phenotypes such as this may be useful for both mapping of genes and understanding the role of genes in bipolar disorder.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".