MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2256113347 · doi:10.1139/jpn.0303

Dopamine genes and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: a review

2003· review· en· W2256113347 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderDopaminePsychologyAttention deficitPsychiatryNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To review the results of genetic studies investigating dopamine-related genes in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). DATA SOURCES: Papers (association/linkage, meta-analyses and animal model studies) were identified through searches of the PubMed database and systematically reviewed. DATA SYNTHESIS: Consistent results from molecular genetic studies are pointing strongly to the possible link between 2 specific genes, the dopamine transporter (SLC3A6) and the dopamine receptor 4 (DRD4), and ADHD. CONCLUSIONS: The implication of SLC6A3 and DRD4 genes in ADHD appears to be one of the most replicated in psychiatric genetics and strongly suggests the involvement of the brain dopamine systems in the pathogenesis of ADHD. However, more work is required to further these findings by genotype-to-phenotype correlations and identify the functional allelic variants/mutations that are responsible for these associations. The role of other dopamine genes, which may have smaller effects than SLC6A3 and DRD4, needs also to be determined.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.309 · 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