MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021950807 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-62693-6

Genome-wide association study of emotional empathy in children

2020· article· en· W3021950807 on OpenAlexafffund
Marc Woodbury‐Smith, Andrew D. Paterson, Péter Szatmári, Stephen W. Scherer

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoPublic Health OntarioHospital for Sick Children
FundersGlaxoSmithKlineUniversity of BristolMedical Research CouncilOntario Genomics InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitute of GeneticsOntario GenomicsGenome CanadaHospital for Sick ChildrenWellcome TrustUniversity of TorontoAutism Speaks
KeywordsEmpathyPseudogeneGeneticsGenomeGenetic associationAssociation (psychology)BiologyGenePsychologyGenotypeSingle-nucleotide polymorphismSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genetic contribution to different aspects of empathy is now established, although the exact loci are unknown. We undertook a genome-wide association study of emotional empathy (EE) as measured by emotion recognition skills in 4,780 8-year old children from the ALSPAC cohort who were genotyped and imputed to Phase 1 version 3 of the 1000 Genomes Project. We failed to find any genome-wide significant signal in either our unstratified analysis or analysis stratified according to sex. A gene-based association analysis similarly failed to find any significant loci. In contrast, our transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) with a whole blood reference panel identified two significant loci in the unstratified analysis, residualised for the effects of age, sex and IQ. One signal was for CD93 on chromosome 20; this gene is not strongly expressed in the brain, however. The other signal was for AL118508, a non-protein coding pseudogene, which completely lies within CD93's genomic coordinates, thereby explaining its signal. Neither are obvious candidates for involvement in the brain processes that underlie emotion recognition and its developmental pathways.

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 score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

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 head0.216
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207