ArticleGenetics in medicine open2025
Systematic phenotype and genotype characterization of Moebius syndrome.
Article in Genetics in medicine open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Craniofacial Characteristics and Orthodontic Management in a Patient With Moebius Syndrome: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Unveiling the Prevalence and Surgical Burden of Neurocristopathies: A Scoping Review and Statistical Analysis.Research square · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
42 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To explore the phenotypic spectrum and genetic etiologies of Moebius Syndrome (MBS), a rare neurological disorder defined by congenital, nonprogressive facial weakness and limitations in ocular abduction. Methods: We applied strict diagnostic criteria and conducted clinical phenotyping of 149 individuals with MBS. Subsequently, we performed exome and/or genome sequencing on 67 of these individuals and 117 unaffected family members. Results: All 149 individuals had sporadic MBS, with no recurrence within or across generations. Common co-occurring phenotypes included tongue hypoplasia (81.9%), micrognathia (66.4%), congenital talipes equinovarus (42.3%), major limb anomalies (31.5%), intellectual disability (30.9%), sleep difficulties (22.8%), and Poland anomaly (14.1%). Filtering for rare de novo or autosomal recessive single-nucleotide, insertion/deletion, and structural variants in the sequenced cohort yielded 173 single-nucleotide variant/indels in 113 genes. Although we prioritized 7 candidate genes with de novo variants and 5 with biallelic variants, no compelling recurrently mutated genes were identified. Similarly, we found no convincing variants in 2 putative genes previously implicated in MBS: Conclusion: We did not identify a strong or unifying germline genetic etiology for MBS. Future studies may explore alternative causes, including environmental exposures, somatic variants, and/or complex inheritance patterns affecting brainstem and organ embryogenesis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.