The norepinephrine transporter gene and attention‐deficit hyperactivity disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adrenergic system plays a known role in attentional systems and a suspected causal role in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), based on evidence from pharmacological interventions and animal models. The efficacy of the highly selective noradrenergic reuptake inhibitor, tomoxetine, in treating ADHD symptoms supports the system's role in ADHD and points to the norephinephrine transporter as a candidate gene. This study tested the gene for the norepinephrine transporter (NET1) as a susceptibility factor in ADHD using three polymorphisms located in exon 9, intron 9, and intron 13. We examined the inheritance of these polymorphisms in a sample of 122 families with a total of 155 children with ADHD identified through an ADHD proband. Use of the transmission disequilibrium test failed to show significant evidence for biased transmission of any of the alleles or the haplotypes of these polymorphisms. We further investigated this gene by screening the probands for five known amino acid variants to determine if they contributed to the ADHD phenotype but observed only one (Thr99Ile) in our sample. Since the frequency of this variant (1.8%) was similar to that previously reported in a control sample (2.2%), it is unlikely that this variant is related to the ADHD phenotype. Our results do not support the NET1 gene as a major genetic susceptibility factor in ADHD.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".