MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139970636 · doi:10.3389/fgene.2012.00116

Genetic variation in Hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated channels and its relationship with neuroticism, cognition and risk of depression

2012· article· en· W2139970636 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew M. McIntosh, Arthur A. Simen, Kathryn L. Evans, Jérémy Hall, Donald J. MacIntyre, Douglas Blackwood, Andrew D. Morris, Blair H. Smith, Anna F. Dominiczak, David J. Porteous, hb Ian J. Deary, Pippa A. Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Genetics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhosphodiesterase function and regulation
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences Centre
FundersScottish Funding CouncilScottish Government
KeywordsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismNeuroticismCognitionEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceGeneticsVerbal fluency testPsychologyHaplotypePsychiatryBiologyClinical psychologyMedicineAlleleGenePersonalityGenotypeNeuropsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated (HCN) channels are encoded by four genes (HCN1-4) and, through activation by cyclic AMP (cAMP), represent a point of convergence for several psychosis risk genes. On the basis of positive preliminary data, we sought to test whether genetic variation in HCN1-4 conferred risk of depression or cognitive impairment in the Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study. HCN1, HCN2, HCN3, and HCN4 were genotyped for 43 haplotype-tagging SNPs and tested for association with DSM-IV depression, neuroticism, and a battery of cognitive tests assessing cognitive ability, memory, verbal fluency, and psychomotor performance. No association was found between any HCN channel gene SNP and risk of depression, neuroticism, or on any cognitive measure. The current study does not support a genetic role for HCN channels in conferring risk of depression or cognitive impairment in individuals from the Scottish population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in GeneticsSame topicPhosphodiesterase function and regulationFrench-language works237,207