The association between genetically determined ABO blood types and major depressive disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABO blood types and their corresponding antigens have long been assumed to be related to different human diseases. So far, smaller studies on the relationship between mental disorders and blood types yielded contradicting results. In this study we analyzed the association between ABO blood types and lifetime major depressive disorder (MDD). We performed a pooled analysis with data from 26 cohorts that are part of the MDD working group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC). The dataset included 37,208 individuals of largely European ancestry of which 41.6% were diagnosed with lifetime MDD. ABO blood types were identified using three single nucleotide polymorphisms in the ABO gene: rs505922, rs8176746 and rs8176747. Regression analyses were performed to assess associations between the individual ABO blood types and MDD diagnosis as well as putative interaction effects with sex. The models were adjusted for sex, cohort and the first ten genetic principal components. The percentage of blood type A was slightly lower in cases than controls while blood type O was more prominent in cases. However, these differences were not statistically significant. Our analyses found no evidence of an association between ABO blood types and major depressive disorder.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".