Assessment and ascertainment in psychiatric molecular genetics: challenges and opportunities for cross-disorder research

IF 9.6 1区 医学 Q1 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY Molecular Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-12-27 DOI:10.1038/s41380-024-02878-x
Na Cai, Brad Verhulst, Ole A. Andreassen, Jan Buitelaar, Howard J. Edenberg, John M. Hettema, Michael Gandal, Andrew Grotzinger, Katherine Jonas, Phil Lee, Travis T. Mallard, Manuel Mattheisen, Michael C. Neale, John I. Nurnberger, Wouter Peyrout, Elliot M. Tucker-Drob, Jordan W. Smoller, Kenneth S. Kendler
{"title":"Assessment and ascertainment in psychiatric molecular genetics: challenges and opportunities for cross-disorder research","authors":"Na Cai, Brad Verhulst, Ole A. Andreassen, Jan Buitelaar, Howard J. Edenberg, John M. Hettema, Michael Gandal, Andrew Grotzinger, Katherine Jonas, Phil Lee, Travis T. Mallard, Manuel Mattheisen, Michael C. Neale, John I. Nurnberger, Wouter Peyrout, Elliot M. Tucker-Drob, Jordan W. Smoller, Kenneth S. Kendler","doi":"10.1038/s41380-024-02878-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Psychiatric disorders are highly comorbid, heritable, and genetically correlated [1,2,3,4]. The primary objective of cross-disorder psychiatric genetics research is to identify and characterize both the shared genetic factors that contribute to convergent disease etiologies and the unique genetic factors that distinguish between disorders [4, 5]. This information can illuminate the biological mechanisms underlying comorbid presentations of psychopathology, improve nosology and prediction of illness risk and trajectories, and aid the development of more effective and targeted interventions. In this review we discuss how estimates of comorbidity and identification of shared genetic loci between disorders can be influenced by how disorders are measured (phenotypic assessment) and the inclusion or exclusion criteria in individual genetic studies (sample ascertainment). Specifically, the depth of measurement, source of diagnosis, and time frame of disease trajectory have major implications for the clinical validity of the assessed phenotypes. Further, biases introduced in the ascertainment of both cases and controls can inflate or reduce estimates of genetic correlations. The impact of these design choices may have important implications for large meta-analyses of cohorts from diverse populations that use different forms of assessment and inclusion criteria, and subsequent cross-disorder analyses thereof. We review how assessment and ascertainment affect genetic findings in both univariate and multivariate analyses and conclude with recommendations for addressing them in future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":19008,"journal":{"name":"Molecular Psychiatry","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Molecular Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-024-02878-x","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Psychiatric disorders are highly comorbid, heritable, and genetically correlated [1,2,3,4]. The primary objective of cross-disorder psychiatric genetics research is to identify and characterize both the shared genetic factors that contribute to convergent disease etiologies and the unique genetic factors that distinguish between disorders [4, 5]. This information can illuminate the biological mechanisms underlying comorbid presentations of psychopathology, improve nosology and prediction of illness risk and trajectories, and aid the development of more effective and targeted interventions. In this review we discuss how estimates of comorbidity and identification of shared genetic loci between disorders can be influenced by how disorders are measured (phenotypic assessment) and the inclusion or exclusion criteria in individual genetic studies (sample ascertainment). Specifically, the depth of measurement, source of diagnosis, and time frame of disease trajectory have major implications for the clinical validity of the assessed phenotypes. Further, biases introduced in the ascertainment of both cases and controls can inflate or reduce estimates of genetic correlations. The impact of these design choices may have important implications for large meta-analyses of cohorts from diverse populations that use different forms of assessment and inclusion criteria, and subsequent cross-disorder analyses thereof. We review how assessment and ascertainment affect genetic findings in both univariate and multivariate analyses and conclude with recommendations for addressing them in future research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Molecular Psychiatry
Molecular Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
20.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
459
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Molecular Psychiatry focuses on publishing research that aims to uncover the biological mechanisms behind psychiatric disorders and their treatment. The journal emphasizes studies that bridge pre-clinical and clinical research, covering cellular, molecular, integrative, clinical, imaging, and psychopharmacology levels.
期刊最新文献
Exposure to childhood maltreatment is associated with specific epigenetic patterns in sperm Unraveling the associations between voice pitch and major depressive disorder: a multisite genetic study Assessment and ascertainment in psychiatric molecular genetics: challenges and opportunities for cross-disorder research Genetic risk for treatment resistant schizophrenia and corresponding variation in dopamine synthesis capacity and D2/3 receptor availability in healthy individuals Clinical response to neurofeedback in major depression relates to subtypes of whole-brain activation patterns during training
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1