Linkage study of two polymorphisms at the dopamine D3 receptor gene and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data from animal studies suggest that the dopamine D3 receptor gene may have a role in locomotion and behavioral regulation. Therefore, this gene has been suggested as a candidate for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The dopamine D3 receptor gene (DRD3) has two common polymorphisms, one in exon I that changes a Serine to Glycine (Ser9Gly) and alters the recognition site for the restriction enzyme MscI [Lannfelt et al., 1992]. The other common polymorphism is located in intron 5 and results in the change of a restriction site for MspI [Griffon et al., 1996]. We investigated the possibility of linkage of the dopamine D3 receptor gene in 100 small, nuclear families consisting of a proband with ADHD, their parents, and affected siblings. We examined the transmission of the alleles of each of these polymorphisms and the haplotypes of both polymorphisms using the transmission disequilibrium test [Spielman et al., 1993]. We did not observe biased transmission of the alleles at either polymorphism or any haplotype. Our findings using this particular sample do not support the role of the dopamine D3 gene in ADHD. Am. J. Med. Genet. (Neuropsychiatr. Genet.) 96:114–117, 2000. © 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".