4.7 Article

The relations among putative biorisk markers in schizotypal adolescents: Minor physical anomalies, movement abnormalities, and salivary cortisol

期刊

BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY
卷 61, 期 10, 页码 1179-1186

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2006.08.043

关键词

cortisol; minor physical anomalies; movement abnormality; MPA; prodromal; schizotypal

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [R01 MH4062066] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Evidence suggests that prenatal insult may play a role in the etiology of psychotic disorders. Minor physical anomalies (MPA) are an indicator of abnormal fetal development and are elevated in individuals at genetic and behavioral risk for psychosis. Yet, there has been little empirical research on the relationships between MPAs and other neurobiological risk indicators. We hypothesized that the frequency of MPAs (an external marker of prenatal central nervous system [CNS] disruption) would be associated with two other biomarkers suggestive of disruptions in fetal neurodevelopment: movement abnormalities (an indicator of striatal abnormalities) and heightened cortisol secretion (an indicator of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal [HPA]/hippocampal function). Methods: Participants with schizotypal personality disorder (SPD; n = 39) and both normal (n = 47) and other personality disorders (n = 28) control subjects were administered structured diagnostic interviews and assessed for MPAs, movement abnormalities, and salivary cortisol. Results: Schizotypal personality disorder participants showed significantly greater MPAs and movement abnormalities and higher cortisol than both the normal and other personality disorders groups. Hierarchal linear regression analyses revealed that higher rates of MPAs were linked with greater movement abnormalities and salivary cortisol. Conclusions: The findings suggest that MPAs serve as a marker of neurodevelopmental abnormalities that affect striatal and hippocampal regions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据