MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Genome-Wide Association Study Meta-Analysis of 9619 Cases With Tic Disorders

2024· review· en· W4403265949 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Psychiatry · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeStockholms Läns LandstingGillings School of Public HealthForskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och VälfärdEuropean CommissionAarhus UniversitetNovo NordiskCenter for Innovative MedicineNational Institutes of HealthH. Lundbeck A/SNational Institute of Mental HealthVetenskapsrådetLundbeckfonden
KeywordsMeta-analysisGenome-wide association studyAssociation (psychology)Genetic associationGeneticsMedicineBiologyComputational biologyInternal medicinePsychologySingle-nucleotide polymorphismGeneGenotypePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite the significant personal and societal burden of tic disorders (TDs), treatment outcomes remain modest, necessitating a deeper understanding of their etiology. Family history is the biggest known risk factor, and identifying risk genes could accelerate progress in the field. METHODS: Expanding upon previous sample size limitations, we added 4800 new TD cases and 971,560 controls and conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) meta-analysis with 9619 cases and 981,048 controls of European ancestry. We attempted to replicate the results in an independent deCODE genetics GWAS (885 TD cases and 310,367 controls). To characterize GWAS findings, we conducted several post-GWAS gene-based and enrichment analyses. RESULTS: ) within MCHR2-AS1 was identified, although it was not replicated. Post-GWAS analyses revealed a 13.8% single nucleotide polymorphism heritability and 3 significant genes: BCL11B, NDFIP2, and RBM26. Common variant risk for TD was enriched within genes preferentially expressed in the cortico-striato-thalamo-cortical circuit (including the putamen, caudate, nucleus accumbens, and Brodmann area 9) and 5 brain cell types (excitatory and inhibitory telencephalon neurons, inhibitory diencephalon and mesencephalon neurons, and hindbrain and medium spiny neurons). TD polygenic risk was enriched within loss-of-function intolerant genes (p = .0017) and high-confidence neurodevelopmental disorder genes (p = .0108). Of 112 genetic correlations, 43 were statistically significant, showing high positive correlations with most psychiatric disorders. Of the 2 single nucleotide polymorphisms previously associated with TDs, one (rs2453763) replicated in an independent subsample of our GWAS (p = .00018). CONCLUSIONS: This GWAS was still underpowered to identify high-confidence, replicable loci, but the results suggest imminent discovery of common genetic variants for TDs.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.294 · 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