The GABA A-Receptor γ2 (GABRG2) Gene in obsessive-compulsive disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The γ-aminobutyric acid type A (GABA(A)) system may be implicated in obsessive-compulsive disorder, based on its major role in modulation of anxiety and its function as the principal inhibitory neurotransmitter system in the cortex. In addition, glutamatergic/GABAergic mechanisms appear to play a role in the pathophysiology of obsessive-compulsive disorder, making the GABA(A) receptor-γ2 (GABργ2) gene a good candidate for susceptibility in this disorder. METHOD: 118 probands meeting DSM-IV criteria for primary obsessive-compulsive disorder and their available parents were recruited for participation in this study and informed consent was obtained. An NciI restriction site polymorphism in the second intron was genotyped and data was analyzed using the Transmission Disequilibrium Test. RESULTS: In total, 61 of the participating families were informative (i.e., with at least one heterozygous parent). No biases were observed in the transmission of either of the two alleles (chi² = 0.016, 1 d.f., p = 0.898) to the affected probands in the total sample. CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION: While these results do not provide support for a major role for the GABA(A) receptor-γ2 in obsessive-compulsive disorder, further investigations of this gene in larger samples are warranted.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".