Association study of the brain‐derived neurotropic factor (BDNF) gene in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a prevalent neurodevelopmental childhood psychiatric disorder. Brain-derived neurotropic factor (BDNF) has been suggested to play a role in the pathogenesis of ADHD and two family-based association studies demonstrated an association of BDNF polymorphisms with ADHD. The aim of the current study was to investigate the BDNF gene for association with ADHD in a large sample of families from Toronto. The transmission of three polymorphisms of the BDNF gene (rs6265, rs11030104, and rs2049046) was examined in 266 nuclear families ascertained through a proband with ADHD (315 affected children) using the transmission/disequilibrium test (TDT). In addition, we conducted quantitative analysis to assess the relationship between these marker alleles and the symptom dimensions of ADHD (inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity) and cognitive measures of working memory. None of the individual marker alleles showed significant evidence of association with ADHD, dimensional symptom scores, or working memory ability in our sample of ADHD families. There was no significant evidence for biased transmission of individual haplotypes with frequency >10% (global chi2 for these three haplotypes: chi2 = 6.349, df = 3, P = 0.096). One uncommon haplotype (A-G-G; frequency 2.2%) showed a significant association with ADHD in the categorical (chi2 = 5.293, df = 1, P = 0.021) and quantitative analyses (parents' rated inattention: Z = -2.504, P = 0.012; and hyperactivity/impulsivity: Z = -2.651, P = 0.008). These results should be interpreted cautiously, however, because of the low haplotype frequency. In light of the evidence for an involvement of BDNF in ADHD, further analysis of the BDNF gene in ADHD is 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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".