MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210380730 · doi:10.1176/ajp.2006.163.10.1832

Episodic Memory Performance Predicted by the 2bp Deletion in Exon 6 of the “Alpha 7-Like” Nicotinic Receptor Subunit Gene

2006· article· en· W4210380730 on OpenAlexaff
Emma Dempster, Timothea Toulopoulou, Colm McDonald, Elvira Bramon, Muriel Walshe, Harvey Wickham, Pak C. Sham, Robin Murray, David Collier

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Psychiatry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors Study
Canadian institutionsToronto Western Hospital
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsEndophenotypeGeneticsLocus (genetics)PsychologyBiologyExonEpisodic memoryGeneNeuroscienceCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: There is evidence of linkage between chromosome 15q14 and the P50 auditory evoked response, a heritable neuropsychological marker associated with increased risk of schizophrenia. Chromosome 15q14 harbors the alpha-7 nicotinic receptor subunit gene (CHRNA7) and a hybrid gene of unknown function (CHRFAM7A). CHRNA7 is involved in memory formation, a core dysfunction in schizophrenia. The authors set out to determine if this locus is associated with memory dysfunction in schizophrenia. Method: A 2bp deletion in exon 6 of CHRFAM7A, which disrupts the hybrid gene and has previously been associated with P50 deficit, was genotyped in 251 individuals from the Maudsley Family Study of schizophrenia. Episodic memory function was assessed using the Wechsler Memory Scale. Results: Significant associations were identified with delayed recall and percentage retained, with the presence of the deletion predicting worse performance. Conclusions: These observations indicate that episodic memory function is a schizophrenia endophenotype and implicate the CHRFAM7A/CHRNA7 locus in modulating its function.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations33
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PsychiatrySame topicNicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors StudyFrench-language works237,207