Association between three functional polymorphisms of the dopamine D2 receptor gene and polydipsia in schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The underlying pathophysiology of polydipsia in schizophrenia is poorly understood. However, several studies suggest there may be a genetic predisposition to polydipsia, including our previous study demonstrating familial concordance of polydipsia among first-degree relatives with schizophrenia. Antipsychotic medications may contribute to the development of polydipsia and studies show that dopamine D2 receptors are involved in drinking behaviour pathophysiology. Our hypothesis is that polymorphisms in the dopamine D2 receptor gene (DRD2) may confer susceptibility to polydipsia in schizophrenia. We tested for an association between polydipsia in schizophrenia and three functional polymorphisms of DRD2. The three polymorphisms, -141C Ins/Del, Ser311Cys, and TaqIA, were genotyped in patients with polydipsia (n = 64) and in those without polydipsia (n = 91). Of the three polymorphisms, TaqIA was significantly associated with polydipsia [genotype: chi2 = 6.59, df = 2, p = 0.037; allele: chi2 = 6.52, df = 1, p = 0.011, OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.15-2.86]. Haplotype analysis of the three markers found increased significance of the association (global, p = 0.00091). Although based on a relatively small portion of the sample, individual comparison of the common haplotypes showed that haplotype Ins-Cys-A1 was significantly less frequent in patients with polydipsia (p = 0.00082). The present data suggests polymorphisms in DRD2 may confer susceptibility to polydipsia in schizophrenia. To confirm our findings, further studies are warranted on larger samples using more extensive biological measures for diagnosing the polydipsia phenotype.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".