The serotonin transporter promoter repeat length polymorphism, seasonal affective disorder and seasonality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Conflicting results have been reported in previous association studies of the serotonin transporter promoter repeat length polymorphism (5-HTTLPR), seasonal affective disorder (SAD) and seasonality (seasonal variations in mood and behaviour). The aim of this study was to test for association in new case-control and population-based materials, and to perform a combined analysis of all published studies of 5-HTTLPR and SAD. METHOD: One hundred and forty-seven new SAD cases and 115 controls were genotyped for 5-HTTLPR and in total 464 patients and 414 controls were included in the pooled analysis. In addition, 226 individuals selected for unusually high or low seasonality scores from a population based material and 46 patients with non-seasonal depression were analysed. Different genetic models were tested and seasonality was analysed both as a qualitative (high v. low) and as a quantitative trait in the different sample sets. RESULTS: No association between 5-HTTLPR and SAD was found in the new case-control material, in the combined analysis of all samples, or when only including 316 patients with controls (N = 298) selected for low seasonality. A difference was detected between the population based high and low seasonality groups, when assuming a recessive effect of the short allele (20% and 10% short allele homozygotes, respectively, OR (95% CI): 2.24 (1.03-4.91)). Quantitative analysis of seasonality revealed no association with 5-HTTLPR in any sample set. CONCLUSIONS: These results do not suggest a major role of the short variant of 5-HTTLPR in susceptibility to SAD, but provide modest evidence for an effect on seasonality.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".