↓ Skip to main content

Genetics of Callous-Unemotional Behavior in Children

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Genetics of Callous-Unemotional Behavior in Children
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0065789
Pubmed ID
Authors

Essi Viding, Thomas S. Price, Sara R. Jaffee, Maciej Trzaskowski, Oliver S. P. Davis, Emma L. Meaburn, Claire M. A. Haworth, Robert Plomin

Abstract

Callous-unemotional behavior (CU) is currently under consideration as a subtyping index for conduct disorder diagnosis. Twin studies routinely estimate the heritability of CU as greater than 50%. It is now possible to estimate genetic influence using DNA alone from samples of unrelated individuals, not relying on the assumptions of the twin method. Here we use this new DNA method (implemented in a software package called Genome-wide Complex Trait Analysis, GCTA) for the first time to estimate genetic influence on CU. We also report the first genome-wide association (GWA) study of CU as a quantitative trait. We compare these DNA results to those from twin analyses using the same measure and the same community sample of 2,930 children rated by their teachers at ages 7, 9 and 12. GCTA estimates of heritability were near zero, even though twin analysis of CU in this sample confirmed the high heritability of CU reported in the literature, and even though GCTA estimates of heritability were substantial for cognitive and anthropological traits in this sample. No significant associations were found in GWA analysis, which, like GCTA, only detects additive effects of common DNA variants. The phrase 'missing heritability' was coined to refer to the gap between variance associated with DNA variants identified in GWA studies versus twin study heritability. However, GCTA heritability, not twin study heritability, is the ceiling for GWA studies because both GCTA and GWA are limited to the overall additive effects of common DNA variants, whereas twin studies are not. This GCTA ceiling is very low for CU in our study, despite its high twin study heritability estimate. The gap between GCTA and twin study heritabilities will make it challenging to identify genes responsible for the heritability of CU.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 112 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 23%
Student > Master 24 21%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Researcher 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 20 18%
Unknown 16 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 52 46%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 9%
Neuroscience 9 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 6%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 21 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 March 2014.
All research outputs
#5,696,232
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#69,080
of 193,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,485
of 194,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,467
of 4,753 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,925 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 194,246 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,753 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.