Cited by 644Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersChild Nutrition and Feeding Issues

Disentangling the heterogeneity of autism spectrum disorder through genetic findings

Open access
Jeste, Shafali S., Geschwind, Daniel H.·2014·Nature Reviews Neurology

Abstract

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) represents a heterogeneous group of disorders, which presents a substantial challenge to diagnosis and treatment. Over the past decade, considerable progress has been made in the identification of genetic risk factors for ASD that define specific mechanisms and pathways underlying the associated behavioural deficits. In this Review, we discuss how some of the latest advances in the genetics of ASD have facilitated parsing of the phenotypic heterogeneity of this disorder. We argue that only through such advances will we begin to define endophenotypes that can benefit from targeted, hypothesis-driven treatments. We review the latest technologies used to identify and characterize the genetics underlying ASD and then consider three themes-single-gene disorders, the gender bias in ASD, and the genetics of neurological comorbidities-that highlight ways in which we can use genetics to define the many phenotypes within the autism spectrum. We also present current clinical guidelines for genetic testing in ASD and their implications for prognosis and treatment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrneurol.2013.278

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jeste, S. S., & Geschwind, D. H.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Jeste, Shafali S.
Venue
Nature Reviews Neurology
Published
2014-01-28
Volume
10
Issue
2
Pages
74-81
ISSN
  • 1759-4758 (ISSN-L)
  • 1759-4766
OpenAlex
W1984331840
Cited by
644
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 90 · 2019: 61 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 69 · 2015: 69 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 1
FWCI
6.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01mh094714-04)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01-MH094714, K23MH094517)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Child Nutrition and Feeding Issues
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, genetic heterogeneity, monogenic disorders, neurological comorbidity, endophenotypes, genetic risk factors, genetic testing guidelines, etiology, neurodevelopmental disorders
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Child Development Disorders, Pervasive, Genetic Testing, Humans, Mutation, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Methyl-CpG-Binding Protein 2

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review