4.7 Article

Recurrence risks for schizophrenia in a Swedish National Cohort

期刊

PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE
卷 36, 期 10, 页码 1417-1425

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291706008385

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [MH074027] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Recurrence risk estimates for schizophrenia are fundamental to our understanding of this complex disease. Widely cited estimates are from small/older samples. If these estimates are biased upwards, then the rationale for molecular genetic studies of schizophrenia may not be as solid. Method. We created a population-based, Swedish national cohort by linking two Swedish national registers into a relational database (the Swedish Hospital Discharge Register and the MultiGeneration Register). Affection was defined as the lifetime presence of at least two in-patient hospitalizations with a core schizophrenia diagnosis. Results. Merging the Swedish national registers created a population-based cohort of 7 739 202 individuals of known parentage. The lifetime prevalence of the narrow definition of schizophrenia was 0(.)407% and we estimated that one in every 79 extended Swedish families had been impacted by schizophrenia. The proportion of affected families with multiple affected members was 3(.)81%. Recurrence risk estimates for all relative types were strikingly similar to those reported in smaller and older studies. For example, we estimated lambda(sibs) at 8(.)55 [95% confidence interval (CI) 7(.)86-9(.)57] compared with a literature estimate of 8(.)6. Conclusions. In the largest and most comprehensive sample yet studied, we confirm the accepted estimates of recurrence risks for schizophrenia, and provide more accurate estimates of recurrence risks of schizophrenia in relatives, an estimate of the familial impact of schizophrenia, and the multiplex proportion (essential for gauging the generalizability of findings from multiplex pedigrees). These data may be valuable for planning and interpreting genetic studies of schizophrenia.

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