Parental Consanguinity Among Schizophrenia Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some studies have reported parental consanguinity as a risk factor for schizophrenia. These finding need replication in different socio-cultural settings. Hence we studied inbreeding to examine its effect on susceptibility to schizophrenia. A case-control study was conducted among people living in a rural community at Turuvekere (SZ, n = 120; controls, n = 222). The prevalence of consanguinity was estimated from family history data ('self report'), followed by DNA analysis using SNPs (n = 384) ('DNAbased' rates) in order to add substantial reliability to our data. Self reported parental consanguinity was elevated among the patients (SZ: 10.71%, controls: 7.69%). Tests for normality of the DNA based estimates for coefficients of inbreeding ' f ' showed that 'f' was not normally distributed. Mann-Whitney U test showed parental consanguinity rates are significantly elevated among the patients relative to the healthy individuals (p = 0.035). Our data suggest that schizophrenia is associated with higher parental consanguinity. Larger cross-sectional studies are warranted to validate our findings.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".