ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2026
Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a leading cause of disability; however, its neurogenetic mechanisms remain partially understood. Comparative genomic approaches reveal evolutionarily conserved risk factors, particularly when applied to ecologically valid models. Methods: Whole-genome sequencing data from Results: SNP rs11643211 showed a nominal genotype × diagnosis interaction on axial diffusivity in the bilateral uncinate fasciculus, with elevated values in A allele carriers with MDD. In symptom-based models, rs1948719 was nominally associated with depression severity in the left cingulum-cingulate gyrus. Although these associations did not survive false discovery rate correction, the nominal effects appeared to cluster within tracts implicated in affective integration and self-referential cognition. Conclusion: The present study is hypothesis-generating and identifies
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.