4 results on '"de Vries YA"'
Search Results
2. Clinical characteristics indexing genetic differences in bipolar disorder - a systematic review.
- Author
-
van Loo HM, de Vries YA, Taylor J, Todorovic L, Dollinger C, and Kendler KS
- Subjects
- Humans, Phenotype, Family, Research Design, Bipolar Disorder genetics, Bipolar Disorder diagnosis, Psychotic Disorders genetics
- Abstract
Bipolar disorder is a heterogenous condition with a varied clinical presentation. While progress has been made in identifying genetic variants associated with bipolar disorder, most common genetic variants have not yet been identified. More detailed phenotyping (beyond diagnosis) may increase the chance of finding genetic variants. Our aim therefore was to identify clinical characteristics that index genetic differences in bipolar disorder.We performed a systematic review of all genome-wide molecular genetic, family, and twin studies investigating familial/genetic influences on the clinical characteristics of bipolar disorder. We performed an electronic database search of PubMed and PsycInfo until October 2022. We reviewed title/abstracts of 2693 unique records and full texts of 391 reports, identifying 445 relevant analyses from 142 different reports. These reports described 199 analyses from family studies, 183 analyses from molecular genetic studies and 63 analyses from other types of studies. We summarized the overall evidence per phenotype considering study quality, power, and number of studies.We found moderate to strong evidence for a positive association of age at onset, subtype (bipolar I versus bipolar II), psychotic symptoms and manic symptoms with familial/genetic risk of bipolar disorder. Sex was not associated with overall genetic risk but could indicate qualitative genetic differences. Assessment of genetically relevant clinical characteristics of patients with bipolar disorder can be used to increase the phenotypic and genetic homogeneity of the sample in future genetic studies, which may yield more power, increase specificity, and improve understanding of the genetic architecture of bipolar disorder., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Statistical power in clinical trials of interventions for mood, anxiety, and psychotic disorders.
- Author
-
de Vries YA, Schoevers RA, Higgins JPT, Munafò MR, and Bastiaansen JA
- Subjects
- Humans, Anxiety Disorders therapy, Reproducibility of Results, Systematic Reviews as Topic, Clinical Trials as Topic, Anxiety therapy, Psychotic Disorders therapy
- Abstract
Background: Previous research has suggested that statistical power is suboptimal in many biomedical disciplines, but it is unclear whether power is better in trials for particular interventions, disorders, or outcome types. We therefore performed a detailed examination of power in trials of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for mood, anxiety, and psychotic disorders., Methods: We extracted data from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Mental Health). We focused on continuous efficacy outcomes and estimated power to detect predetermined effect sizes (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.20-0.80, primary SMD = 0.40) and meta-analytic effect sizes (ES
MA ). We performed meta-regression to estimate the influence of including underpowered studies in meta-analyses., Results: We included 256 reviews with 10 686 meta-analyses and 47 384 studies. Statistical power for continuous efficacy outcomes was very low across intervention and disorder types (overall median [IQR] power for SMD = 0.40: 0.32 [0.19-0.54]; for ESMA : 0.23 [0.09-0.58]), only reaching conventionally acceptable levels (80%) for SMD = 0.80. Median power to detect the ESMA was higher in treatment-as-usual (TAU)/waitlist-controlled (0.49-0.63) or placebo-controlled (0.12-0.38) trials than in trials comparing active treatments (0.07-0.13). Adequately-powered studies produced smaller effect sizes than underpowered studies ( B = -0.06, p ⩽ 0.001)., Conclusions: Power to detect both predetermined and meta-analytic effect sizes in psychiatric trials was low across all interventions and disorders examined. Consistent with the presence of reporting bias, underpowered studies produced larger effect sizes than adequately-powered studies. These results emphasize the need to increase sample sizes and to reduce reporting bias against studies reporting null results to improve the reliability of the published literature.- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. Clinical characteristics indexing genetic differences in schizophrenia: a systematic review.
- Author
-
Taylor J, de Vries YA, van Loo HM, and Kendler KS
- Subjects
- Female, Humans, Genetic Predisposition to Disease genetics, Risk Factors, Phenotype, Schizophrenia genetics, Schizophrenia diagnosis, Psychotic Disorders genetics, Psychotic Disorders diagnosis
- Abstract
Genome-wide studies are among the best available tools for identifying etiologic processes underlying psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia. However, it is widely recognized that disorder heterogeneity may limit genetic insights. Identifying phenotypes indexing genetic differences among patients with non-affective psychotic disorder will improve genome-wide studies of these disorders. The present study systematically reviews existing literature to identify phenotypes that index genetic differences among patients with schizophrenia and related disorders. We systematically reviewed family-based studies and genome-wide molecular-genetic studies investigating whether phenotypic variation in patients with non-affective psychotic disorders (according to DSM or equivalent systems) was associated with genome-wide genetic variation (PROSPERO number CRD42019136169). An electronic database search of PubMed, EMBASE, and PsycINFO from inception until 17 May 2019 resulted in 4347 published records. These records included a total of 813 relevant analyses from 264 articles. Two independent raters assessed the quality of all analyses based on methodologic rigor and power. We found moderate to strong evidence for a positive association between genetic/familial risk for non-affective psychosis and four phenotypes: early age of onset, negative/deficit symptoms, chronicity, and functional impairment. Female patients also tended to have more affected relatives. Severity of positive symptoms was not associated with genetic/familial risk for schizophrenia. We suggest that phenotypes with the most evidence for reflecting genetic difference in participating patients should be measured in future large-scale genetic studies of schizophrenia to improve power to discover causal variants and to facilitate discovery of modifying genetic variants., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.