Genetic polymorphisms and their association with neurobiological and psychological factors in anorexia nervosa: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and aims Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a complex neuropsychiatric disorder. This systematic review synthesizes evidence from diverse studies to assess and investigate the association between gene polymorphisms and psychological and neurobiological factors in patients with AN. Methods A systematic search across PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science databases, along with manual searching, was conducted. The review protocol was approved by PROSPERO (CRD42023452548). Out of 1,250 articles, 11 met the inclusion criteria. The quality of eligible articles was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) tool. The systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines. Results The serotoninergic system, particularly the 5-HTTLPR polymorphism, is consistently linked to altered connectivity in the ventral attention network, impaired inhibitory control, and increased susceptibility to AN. The 5-HTTLPR polymorphism affects reward processing, motivation, reasoning, working memory, inhibition, and outcome prediction in patients with AN. The dopaminergic system, involving genes like COMT, DRD2, DRD3, and DAT1, regulates reward, motivation, and decision-making. Genetic variations in these dopaminergic genes are associated with psychological manifestations and clinical severity in patients with AN. Across populations, the Val66Met polymorphism in the BDNF gene influences personality traits, eating behaviors, and emotional responses. Genes like OXTR, TFAP2B, and KCTD15 are linked to social cognition, emotional processing, body image concerns, and personality dimensions in patients with AN. Conclusion There was an association linking multiple genes to the susceptibly and/or severity of AN. This genetic factor contributes to the complexity of AN and leads to higher diversity of its clinical presentation. Therefore, conducting more extensive research to elucidate the underlying mechanisms of anorexia nervosa pathology is imperative for advancing our understanding and potentially developing targeted therapeutic interventions for the disorder. Systematic review registration: [ https://clinicaltrials.gov/ ], identifier [CRD42023452548].
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 | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".