Within-family influences on dimensional neurobehavioral traits in a high-risk genetic model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genotype-first and within-family studies can elucidate factors that contribute to psychiatric illness. Combining these approaches, we investigated the patterns of influence of parental scores, a high-impact variant, and schizophrenia on dimensional neurobehavioral phenotypes implicated in major psychiatric disorders. METHODS: 22q11.2 deletion (22 with schizophrenia), and 148 of their unaffected parents. We calculated within-family correlations and effect sizes of the 22q11.2 deletion and schizophrenia, and used linear regressions to assess contributions to neurobehavioral measures. RESULTS: < 0.0001), but not for social or motor measures. Compared to biparental scores, the 22q11.2 deletion conferred significant impairments for all phenotypes assessed (effect sizes -1.39 to -2.07 s.d.), strongest for PIQ. There were further decrements in those with schizophrenia. Regression models explained up to 37.7% of the variance in IQ and indicated that for proband IQ, parental IQ had larger effects than schizophrenia. CONCLUSIONS: This study, for the first time, disentangles the impact of a high-impact variant from the modifying effects of parental scores and schizophrenia on relevant neurobehavioral phenotypes. The robust proband-parent correlations for cognitive measures, independent of the impact of the 22q11.2 deletion and of schizophrenia, suggest that, for certain phenotypes, shared genetic variation plays a significant role in expression. Molecular genetic and predictor studies are needed to elucidate shared factors and their contribution to psychiatric illness in this and other high-risk groups.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".