The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 34 of the 45 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Intelligence is highly heritable 1 and a major determinant of human health and well-being 2. Recent genome-wide meta-analyses have identified 24 genomic loci linked to variation in intelligence 3-7, but much about its genetic underpinnings remains to be discovered. Here, we present a large-scale genetic association study of intelligence (n = 269,867), identifying 205 associated genomic loci (190 new) and 1,016 genes (939 new) via positional mapping, expression quantitative trait locus (eQTL) mapping, chromatin interaction mapping, and gene-based association analysis. We find enrichment of genetic effects in conserved and coding regions and associations with 146 nonsynonymous exonic variants. Associated genes are strongly expressed in the brain, specifically in striatal medium spiny neurons and hippocampal pyramidal neurons. Gene set analyses implicate pathways related to nervous system development and synaptic structure. We confirm previous strong genetic correlations with multiple health-related outcomes, and Mendelian randomization analysis results suggest protective effects of intelligence for Alzheimer's disease and ADHD and bidirectional causation with pleiotropic effects for schizophrenia. These results are a major step forward in understanding the neurobiology of cognitive function as well as genetically related neurological and psychiatric disorders.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
48 Own result · 27 Own method · 12 Own interpretation · 10 Supported · 9 Partly supported · 6 Couldn’t confirm · 6 No full text of the sources · 3 No basis given · 2 Supported so far · 1 Sources not found · accuracy not yet measured
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“supporting the universality of g 15,16”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [15] Deary, I. J., Penke, L. & Johnson, W. The neuroscience of human intelligence differences. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 11, 201–211 (2010). source
The psychometric properties of intelligence section says the general hierarchical pattern has been replicated in hundreds of datasets. Box 2 describes near-universal positive covariation among cognitive tests and says g factors from sufficiently diverse test batteries are almost perfectly correlated. These passages support the citing sentence’s general claim about g. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [16] Deary, I. J. Intelligence. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 63, 453–482 (2012). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“a linkage disequilibrium (LD) score intercept 17 of 1.08 (s.e.= 0.02)”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [17] Bulik-Sullivan, B. K. et al. LD Score regression distinguishes confounding from polygenicity in genome-wide association studies. Nat. Genet. 47, 291–295 (2015). source
Citation 17 follows “LD score intercept,” so it identifies the method rather than sourcing the citing paper’s estimate of 1.08 (s.e. 0.02). The Introduction defines the LD Score regression intercept; the Results > Real Data section reports its use in GWAS analyses. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“indicated that most of the inflation (λ GC = 1.92) could be explained by polygenic signal 6”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [6] Trampush, J. W. et al. GWAS meta-analysis reveals novel loci and genetic correlates for general cognitive function: a report from the COGENT consortium. Mol. Psychiatry 22, 336–345 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In Results, under “GWAS of general cognitive function,” the paper says polygenicity accounted for most of the increase in the mean χ² statistic. But it reports λGC = 1.12, not 1.92. (LLM, conf=0.92)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“regulation of synapse structure or activity (P = 5.42 × 10 -6 )”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [26] Ashburner, M. et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat. Genet. 25, 25–29 (2000). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The passages headed “A dynamic gene ontology” and “Examples of GO annotation” describe the ontology and its use for gene annotation, not an association with intelligence. A search of our copy for the named synapse term, intelligence, and the reported P value found no passage addressing this result. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“neurogenesis (P = 4.78 × 10 -7 )”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [26] Ashburner, M. et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat. Genet. 25, 25–29 (2000). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract describes the Gene Ontology as a vocabulary for annotating genes, but does not report an association between a neurogenesis gene set and intelligence. Searches for neurogenesis, intelligence, and the stated P value found no passage addressing that result in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“This method is more robust to type I error than self-contained tests that only test for association of a gene set against the null hypothesis of no association 25 .”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [25] de Leeuw, C. A., Mooij, J. M., Heskes, T. & Posthuma, D. MAGMA: generalized gene-set analysis of GWAS data. PLoS Comput. Biol. 11, e1004219 (2015). source
The Results section (“Type 1 error rates”) reports that both tests controlled type I error under a global null, but under a polygenic null the competitive test remained well controlled while self-contained test rates were considerably inflated. The CD gene-set analysis explains that competitive tests account for baseline association, whereas self-contained tests assess association with the phenotype. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“positive regulation of nervous system development (P = 1.00 × 10 -6 )”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [26] Ashburner, M. et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat. Genet. 25, 25–29 (2000). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper’s Abstract describes the Gene Ontology as a controlled vocabulary for annotating genes, but it does not report an association between a nervous-system-development gene set and intelligence. Searches for the specific term, intelligence, and the stated P value found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“We conducted GWAS of educational attainment, an outcome with a high genetic correlation with intelligence 5 , in a non-overlapping European subset of the UKB sample (n = 188,435) who did not complete the intelligence measure.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [5] Sniekers, S. et al. Genome-wide association meta-analysis of 78,308 individuals identifies new loci and genes influencing human intelligence. Nat. Genet. 49, 1107–1112 (2017). source
The citation is attached to the statement that educational attainment has a high genetic correlation with intelligence, not to the citing authors’ description of their UKB GWAS sample. The source’s Additional information section reports a genetic correlation of 0.73 in a non-overlapping subsample; the letters section likewise describes the correlation as high. Page numbers are not available in the supplied copy. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plainn = 188,435- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“regulation of nervous system development (P = 9.30 × 10 -7 )”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [26] Ashburner, M. et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat. Genet. 25, 25–29 (2000). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper describes the Gene Ontology and its gene annotations (Abstract), but our copy does not report an association between a nervous-system-development gene set and intelligence. Searches for the gene-set term, intelligence, and the stated P value found no passage addressing that result. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“neuron differentiation (P = 4.82 × 10 -6 )”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [26] Ashburner, M. et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat. Genet. 25, 25–29 (2000). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper’s Abstract describes the Gene Ontology as a controlled vocabulary for annotating genes, not a test of association with intelligence. Searches for “neuron differentiation” and the stated P value found no passage reporting that association. (LLM, conf=0.77)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
- Probably not a substantial claim. 40
- It may state two separate claims as one. 20
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Intelligence has been associated with a wide variety of human behaviors 15 and brain anatomy 27”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [15] Deary, I. J., Penke, L. & Johnson, W. The neuroscience of human intelligence differences. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 11, 201–211 (2010). source
Citation 27 is attached to the brain-anatomy part of the sentence. In “Seguing into neuroscience,” the paper reports a positive correlation between general intelligence and brain size; “Shared genetic influences between brain structure/function and intelligence?” also describes associations with multiple brain structures. The supplied passages do not give page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Supportedcites [27] Posthuma, D. et al. The association between brain volume and intelligence is of genetic origin. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 83–84 (2002). source
The cited paper supports the brain-anatomy part of the sentence, to which citation 27 is attached. In its main text, it reports significant correlations between general intelligence and both gray- and white-matter volume. The supplied passages do not identify a page number. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Recent genome-wide metaanalyses have identified 24 genomic loci linked to variation in intelligence 3-7”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [3] Davies, G. et al. Genetic contributions to variation in general cognitive function: a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies in the CHARGE consortium (N = 53949). Mol. Psychiatry 20, 183–192 (2015). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report 13 genome-wide significant SNPs in three genomic regions associated with general cognitive function. This supports the claim that a genome-wide meta-analysis identified linked regions, but this paper does not establish the cited sentence’s total of 24 loci across multiple analyses. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Partly supportedcites [4] Davies, G. et al. Genome-wide association study of cognitive functions and educational attainment in UK Biobank (N = 112 151). Mol. Psychiatry 21, 758–767 (2016). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page unavailable) reports genome-wide significant associations with general cognitive function, and the Results section on verbal–numerical reasoning (page unavailable) identifies three associated genomic regions. These passages support the link between genomic loci and cognitive variation, but the paper does not establish the claimed total of 24 loci identified by recent meta-analyses. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Partly supportedcites [5] Sniekers, S. et al. Genome-wide association meta-analysis of 78,308 individuals identifies new loci and genes influencing human intelligence. Nat. Genet. 49, 1107–1112 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Letters section reports that this genome-wide meta-analysis identified loci associated with intelligence, supporting the general point. It reports 18 independent significant loci, not 24; the cited paper alone therefore does not substantiate the sentence’s total across multiple studies. No page number is supplied in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [6] Trampush, J. W. et al. GWAS meta-analysis reveals novel loci and genetic correlates for general cognitive function: a report from the COGENT consortium. Mol. Psychiatry 22, 336–345 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (GWAS of general cognitive function; page unavailable) report two genome-wide-significant loci, supporting the claim that a meta-analysis identified loci associated with cognitive performance. The Abstract reports that 24 is the number of cohorts studied, not the number of loci identified; it also reports three additional loci from gene-based analysis. This source therefore does not support the count of 24 genomic loci. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Partly supportedcites [7] Zabaneh, D. et al. A genome-wide association study for extremely high intelligence. Mol. Psychiatry 23, 1226–1232 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Analysis of genome-wide SNPs; page unavailable) identify three significant SNPs at one ADAM12 locus, and the Introduction discusses earlier genome-wide studies of intelligence. Neither passage supports the specific claim that meta-analyses identified 24 loci. (LLM, conf=0.83)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“a major determinant of human health and well-being 2”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [2] Wraw, C., Deary, I. J., Gale, C. R. & Der, G. Intelligence in youth and health at age 50. Intelligence 53, 23–32 (2015). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract’s Results & conclusion and the Discussion (page numbers not provided) link higher intelligence in youth with better physical health and fewer chronic conditions at age 50. They describe associations, not intelligence as a major determinant of human health generally, and the study does not establish an effect on well-being. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Such findings are consistent with previous studies implicating bidirectional causal effects 30,31”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [30] Johnson, W., Deary, I. J. & Iacono, W. G. Genetic and environmental transactions underlying educational attainment. Intelligence 37, 466–478 (2009). source
The paper’s discussion of prior research says studies indicate that intelligence has causal effects on education. It also reports that studies of schooling generally found more time in school leads to greater intelligence. The claim’s word “implicating” appropriately reflects the paper’s caution that causal effects may flow in both directions (page unavailable in our copy). (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [31] Richards, M. & Sacker, A. Is education causal? Yes. Int. J. Epidemiol. 40, 516–518 (2011). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Conserved and regulatory regions have previously been implicated in cognitive functioning 22 , but coding regions have not.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [22] Hill, W. D. et al. Molecular genetic aetiology of general cognitive function is enriched in evolutionarily conserved regions. Transl. Psychiatry 6, e980 (2016). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Partitioned heritability; page unavailable) report enrichment for cognitive-function heritability in conserved regions and in regulatory annotations, including weak enhancers and DNase hypersensitivity sites. The paper does not establish the broader claim that coding regions have not been implicated in cognitive functioning. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“A number of previous reports support both a causal link and genetic overlap between these phenotypes 32,33”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [32] Kendler, K. S., Ohlsson, H., Sundquist, J. & Sundquist, K. IQ and schizophrenia in a Swedish national sample: their causal relationship and the interaction of IQ with genetic risk. Am. J. Psychiatry 172, 259–265 (2015). source
The Discussion reports prior evidence of genetic overlap between IQ and schizophrenia liability, including a twin study finding a strong negative genetic correlation. Its Conclusions say the IQ–schizophrenia association may be causal, while clarifying that shared genetic risk does not explain the association in this sample. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [33] Le Hellard, S. et al. Identification of gene loci that overlap between schizophrenia and educational attainment. Schizophr. Bull. 43, 654–664 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion and the ‘Genetic Overlap of SCZ and Educational Attainment’ section report genetic overlap between general cognition and schizophrenia; page numbers are unavailable in our copy. The paper does not establish a causal link between intelligence and schizophrenia, so it supports only the genetic-overlap part of the claim. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“We used an FDR of 1 × 10 -5 to define significant interactions, based on previous recommendations 51 modified to account for the differences in cell lines used here.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [51] Schmitt, A. D. et al. A compendium of chromatin contact maps reveals spatially active regions in the human genome. Cell Rep. 17, 2042–2059 (2016). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Experimental Procedures ('Identification of significant Hi-C contacts') support using an FDR threshold to define significant contacts, but specify FDR < 1 × 10⁻⁶, not 1 × 10⁻⁵. The Results ('Identification of Frequently Interacting Regions') discuss variation between samples, but do not describe the citing authors’ cell-line-specific modification. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Briefly, brain-cell-type expression data were drawn from single-cell RNA-seq data from mouse brains.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [53] Skene, N. G. et al. Genetic identification of brain cell types underlying schizophrenia. Nat. Genet. 50, 825–833 (2018). source
In Results, under “Cell type specificity of gene expression,” the paper describes assembling brain single-cell RNA-seq data and identifies the resulting dataset as the “KI mouse superset.” It then uses those data to estimate gene-expression specificity by cell type, supporting the claim about the source of the cell-type expression data. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Supportedcites [37] Coleman, J.R.I. et al. Biological annotation of genetic loci associated with intelligence in a meta-analysis of 87,740 individuals. Mol. Psychiatry https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-018-0040-6 (2018). source
The Materials and Methods section (‘Tissue- and cell-specific gene expression’) explicitly says brain cell-type expression data came from scRNA-seq data from mouse brain. It also describes calculating expression scores for each cell type, consistent with using those data to construct the cell-type gene sets. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Comparison with previous GWAS 28 supported these correlations, showing numerous shared genetic variants across phenotypes”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [28] MacArthur, J. et al. The new NHGRI-EBI Catalog of published genome-wide association studies (GWAS Catalog). Nucleic Acids Res. 45(D1), D896–D901 (2017). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page not provided) says GWAS Catalog data have been used to find evidence of pleiotropy, which supports the general idea of genetic associations across traits. It does not report the citing authors’ comparison with previous GWAS, confirm their correlations, or show that numerous variants were shared across the phenotypes they studied. (LLM, conf=0.80)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“A CADD score above 12.37 is the threshold to be potentially pathogenic 23 .”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [23] Kircher, M. et al. A general framework for estimating the relative pathogenicity of human genetic variants. Nat. Genet. 46, 310–315 (2014). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Technical Report says CADD scores rank known pathogenic variants highly, but it does not establish 12.37 as a pathogenicity threshold. It also says C-scores cannot be precisely calibrated to the likelihood that a variant is pathogenic and are best interpreted as indicating likelihood of deleteriousness. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The estimated causal effect coefficients (b xy ) are approximately equal to the natural log odds ratio (OR) for a case-control trait 29 .”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [29] Zhu, Z. et al. Causal associations between risk factors and common diseases inferred from GWAS summary data. Nat. Commun. 9, 224 (2018). source
The Results (Overview of the methods) state that the GSMR estimate of bxy approximately equals logOR, where OR is the effect of a risk factor on disease without confounding. The Methods (The GSMR method) add that the approach applies to case–control disease data because logOR is free of ascertainment bias. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“This method improves power when using an extreme case sampling design such as that in HiQ 35 and provides a comparable metric with which to combine information from different analytic designs while accounting for their differences in power/effective sample size.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [35] Peloso, G. M. et al. Phenotypic extremes in rare variant study designs. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 24, 924–930 (2016). source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Independently associated loci from the metaanalysis were defined using FUMA 24 (see URLs), an online platform for functional mapping of genetic variants.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [24] Watanabe, K., Taskesen, E., van Bochoven, A. & Posthuma, D. Functional mapping and annotation of genetic associations with FUMA. Nat. Commun. 8, 1826 (2017). source
The Results section (‘Overview of FUMA web application’) says FUMA identifies independent significant SNPs and their surrounding genomic loci from supplied GWAS summary statistics. The Methods section (‘Characterization of genomic risk loci based on GWAS’) describes how it defines those loci. This supports citing FUMA as the platform used for that step; the source does not independently document the citing authors’ meta-analysis. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Convergent evidence of strong association (z = 9.49) and the highest observed probability of a deleterious protein effect (CADD 23 score = 34) were found for rs13107325.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [23] Kircher, M. et al. A general framework for estimating the relative pathogenicity of human genetic variants. Nat. Genet. 46, 310–315 (2014). source
The citation marker appears immediately after “CADD,” identifying the scoring method rather than sourcing the rs13107325 result. The Technical Report (page unavailable) describes CADD as a framework for scoring human variants by estimated deleteriousness; the z statistic and score of 34 are not the part attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This method can help differentiate the likely causal direction of association between two traits but cannot make any statement about the intermediate mechanisms involved in any potential causal process.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [29] Zhu, Z. et al. Causal associations between risk factors and common diseases inferred from GWAS summary data. Nat. Commun. 9, 224 (2018). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods section describes GSMR as testing whether an exposure causally affects an outcome, and the Results section uses forward and reverse GSMR analyses to assess direction. The Results also say it is difficult to distinguish whether an effect is mediated by other risk factors or driven by them. But the paper does examine associations among risk factors and conditional effects, so the categorical claim that GSMR cannot make any statement about intermediate mechanisms overstates its stated limitation. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The effect of non-pleiotropic SNPs on an exposure is related to their effect on the outcome in an independent sample only via mediation through the phenotypic causal pathway.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“FUMA currently contains Hi-C data for 14 tissue types from the study of Schmitt et al. 51 .”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [51] Schmitt, A. D. et al. A compendium of chromatin contact maps reveals spatially active regions in the human genome. Cell Rep. 17, 2042–2059 (2016). source
The Results section, “A compendium of chromatin organization maps across 21 human cell and tissue types,” states that Schmitt et al. conducted Hi-C analysis on 14 primary human tissues. This supports the citation identifying the study as the source of those data; it does not independently verify FUMA’s contents. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“comparable heritability across age groups, as captured by the SNPs included in the analysis (h SNP 2 = 0.19-0.22)”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Conditional analysis indicated that there were three independent associations-regulation of nervous system development, central nervous system neuron differentiation, and regulation of synapse structure or activity-that together accounted for the associations of the other sets.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“of which 350 were also mapped by FUMA”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The FUMA-mapped genes were enriched for brain tissue expression and several regulatory biological gene sets”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cross-locus interactions implicated ELAVL2, PTCH1, ATF4, FBXL17, and MAN2A1 in the left ventricle of the heart, SATB2 in liver tissue, and MEF2C in five tissues.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Letters
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This missense mutation (MAF = 0.065, P = 2.23 × 10 -21 ) in SLC39A8 was the lead SNP in locus 71”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“twin and family studies show strong genetic correlations across diverse cognitive domains 11 , suggesting pleiotropy, and across levels of ability 11”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [11] Plomin, R. & Kovas, Y. Generalist genes and learning disabilities. Psychol. Bull. 131, 592–617 (2005). source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“the variance common across cognitive tasks can be modeled as a latent factor denoted as g (the general factor of intelligence) 9,10”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [9] Carroll, J. B. Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor-Analytic Studies. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1993). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [10] Spearman, C. “General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. Am. J. Psychol. 15, 201–292 (1904). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Bonferroni-corrected significance threshold was 0.05/56 annotations = 0.0009.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This reduced the number of genes mapped but increased the likelihood that those identified would have a plausible biological function.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SNP-based replication was carried out using a proxy phenotype of educational attainment in an independent sample.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > 3. Replication
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We used a threshold P value of 0.01 for the outlier detection analysis in HEIDI, which removes 1% of SNPs by chance if there is no pleiotropic effect.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With the exception of HiQ/HRS, all cohorts extracted a single sum score, mean score, or factor score from a multidimensional set of cognitive performance tests and used this normally distributed score as the phenotype in a covariate-adjusted (for example, age, sex, ancestry principal components) GWAS using linear regression methods.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Bonferroni-corrected significance threshold was 0.05/38 traits = 1.32 × 10 -3 .”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many of these have been identified by non-GWAS sources and are not represented in the NHGRI catalog.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We calculated polygenic scores (PGSs) based on the SNP effect sizes of the leave-one-out meta-analyses, from which four cohorts were (separately) excluded and reserved for score validation.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The X chromosome was treated separately in the meta-analysis because imputed genotypes were not available for the X chromosome in the largest cohort (UKB), and there was little overlap between the UKB called genotypes and imputed data from other cohorts (n SNPs < 500).”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“We therefore included only the called X-chromosome variants in UKB for these analyses after performing X-chromosome-specific quality-control steps 38 .”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [38] König, I. R., Loley, C., Erdmann, J. & Ziegler, A. How to include chromosome X in your genome-wide association study. Genet. Epidemiol. 38, 97–103 (2014). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Bonferroni-corrected significance threshold was 0.05/9,494 gene sets = 5.27 × 10 -6 .”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We used a false discovery rate (FDR) of 0.05 to define significant eQTL associations”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The explained variance (Δ R 2 ) was derived from a linear model in which the GWAS intelligence phenotype was regressed on each PGS while controlling for the same covariates as in each cohort-specific GWAS, compared to a linear model with GWAS covariates only.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All files were checked for data integrity and accuracy.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Bonferroni-corrected significance threshold was 0.05/7,323 gene sets = 6.83 × 10 -6 .”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After combining all data, meta-analysis results were further filtered to exclude any variants with n < 50,000.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We first identified 'independent significant SNPs' , which had a Bonferroni-corrected genome-wide significant two-tailed P value (P < 5 × 10 -8 ) and represented signals that were independent from each other at r 2 < 0.6.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indels and SNPs that were duplicated, multiallelic, monomorphic, or ambiguous (A/T or C/G with MAF > 0.4) were also excluded.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Bonferroni-corrected genome-wide significance threshold was 0.05/18,128 genes = 2.76 × 10 -6 .”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To create independent discovery samples for use in polygenic score validation, we also conducted meta-analyses with a 'leave-one-out' strategy in which summary statistics from four validation datasets were each excluded from the meta-analysis”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“SNPs were filtered from further analysis if they met any of the following criteria: imputation quality (INFO/R 2 ) score < 0.6, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium P < 5 × 10 -6 , study-specific minor allele frequency (MAF) corresponding to a minor allele count (MAC) < 100, and mismatch of alleles or allele frequency difference greater than 20% from the Haplotype Reference Consortium (HRC) genome reference”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [16] Deary, I. J. Intelligence. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 63, 453–482 (2012). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Visual inspection of the distribution of the summary statistics was performed, and Manhattan plots and quantile-quantile plots were created for the cleaned summary statistics from each cohort (Supplementary Fig. 1).”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because chromatin interactions are often defined in a certain resolution, such as 40 kb, an interacting region can span multiple genes.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants ranged from children to older adults, with older samples being screened for cognitive decline to exclude the possibility of dementia affecting performance on cognitive tests.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We additionally included a random-effects meta-analysis for each phase, as implemented in METAL, to evaluate potential heterogeneity in the SNP association statistics between cohorts.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For each independent genomic locus, we considered it to be evidence for replication if the lead SNP or another correlated SNP in the region was sign concordant with the corresponding SNP in the intelligence meta-analysis and had a two-tailed P value of association with educational attainment smaller than 0.05/242 independent tests = 0.0002.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plaincorrelationaln = 188,435- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To test replication of the SNPs with this proxy phenotype, we performed a sign concordance test for all genome-wide significant SNPs from the meta-analysis using the two-tailed exact binomial test.”
§ Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence > Additional information
plaincorrelationaln = 188,435- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
The GSMR analysis assumptions (e.g., genetic instruments are valid and not horizontally pleiotropic) hold for the causal inferences.
“We used Generalized Summary-data-based Mendelian randomization 29 to test for potential credible causal associations between intelligence and genetically correlated traits”
The paper relies on this without support.
A common latent g factor underlies multiple dimensions of cognitive functioning and can be indexed by the different intelligence measures used across cohorts.
“Different measures of intelligence were assessed in each cohort but were all operationalized to index a common latent g factor underlying multiple dimensions of cognitive functioning.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The effect of non-pleiotropic SNPs on an exposure is related to their effect on the outcome in an independent sample only via mediation through the phenotypic causal pathway.
“given the assumption that the effect of non-pleiotropic SNPs on an exposure (x) should be related to their effect on the outcome (y) in an independent sample only via mediation through the phenotypic causal pathway (b xy )”
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Most genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to date have focused on intelligence or g [234–237], and suggest that hundreds to thousands of genes additively influence variation in intelligence, with the effect of any one gene being very small (typically in GWAS, a variant has r2 < 0.05% [238]).”
From The role of prefrontal cortex in cognitive control and executive function (2022) · cites this paper as [234]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“The gene is highly expressed in the brain, particularly in oligodendrocytes and their precursor cells, and has been implicated in large-scale genetic studies of intelligence and general cognitive ability43.”
From Locus for severity implicates CNS resilience in progression of multiple sclerosis (2023) · cites this paper as [43]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Genetic variants in dysbindin-1 are strongly associated with human intelligence [51].”
From Oxytocin Signaling in the Central Amygdala Modulates Emotion Discrimination in Mice (2019) · cites this paper as [51]
Citations
Cites
Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology
Ashburner, M., Ball, C. A., Blake, J. A., Botstein, D., Butler, H., Cherry, J. M., Davis, A. P., Dolinski, K., Dwight, S. S., Eppig, J. T., et al. (2000) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/75556 · Cited by 43,206
ANNOVAR: functional annotation of genetic variants from high-throughput sequencing data
Wang, K., Li, M., & Hakonarson, H. H. (2010) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkq603 · Cited by 14,724
Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets
Chang, C. C., Chow, C. C., Tellier, L. C., Vattikuti, S., Purcell, S. M., & Lee, J. J. (2015) · Gigascience · doi:10.1186/s13742-015-0047-8 · Cited by 12,709
Molecular signatures database (MSigDB) 3.0
Liberzon, A., Subramanian, A., Pinchback, R., Thorvaldsdóttir, H., Tamayo, P., & Mesirov, J. P. (2011) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btr260 · Cited by 7,111
Integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes
Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium, Kundaje, A., Meuleman, W., Ernst, J., Bilenky, M., Yen, A., Heravi-Moussavi, A., Kheradpour, P., Zhang, Z., Wang, J., et al. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14248 · Cited by 6,368
"General Intelligence," Objectively Determined and Measured
Spearman, C. (1904) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1412107 · Cited by 6,207
A general framework for estimating the relative pathogenicity of human genetic variants
Kircher, M., Witten, D. M., Jain, P., O'Roak, B. J., Cooper, G. M., & Shendure, J. (2014) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.2892 · Cited by 6,183
LD Score regression distinguishes confounding from polygenicity in genome-wide association studies
Schizophrenia Working Group of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium, Bulik-Sullivan, B. K., Loh, P.-R., Finucane, H. K., Ripke, S., Yang, J., Patterson, N., Daly, M. J., Price, A. L., & Neale, B. M. (2015) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.3211 · Cited by 5,559
METAL: fast and efficient meta-analysis of genomewide association scans
Willer, C. J., Li, Y., & Abecasis, G. R. (2010) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btq340 · Cited by 5,205
Self-citationThe Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) pilot analysis: Multitissue gene regulation in humans
The GTEx Consortium, Ardlie, K. G., Deluca, D. S., Segrè, A. V., Sullivan, T. J., Young, T. R., Gelfand, E. T., Trowbridge, C. A., Maller, J. B., Tukiainen, T., et al. (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1262110 · Cited by 5,062
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,100 of 1,299
Zhang, Z., Zhang, S., & Xu, Y. (2025) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-6373286/v1 · Cited by 1
Xiang, Y., Tanwar, V., Singh, P. P., Follette, L. L., Narayan, V. P., & Kapahi, P. (2025) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.102447.3 · Cited by 1
Genomic dimensions deconstruct the clinical heterogeneity of bipolar disorderPreprint
van der Veen, T., Tesfaye, M., Yang, J. M. K., Boltz, T. A., David, F. S., Crinion, S., Koromina, M., Andlauer, T. F. M., Bigdeli, T. B., Coombes, B. J., et al. (2025) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2025.06.23.25330155 · Cited by 3
Self-citationFunctional consequences of genetic risk for neuropsychiatric conditions at chr22qPreprint
Nadig, A., Tegtmeyer, M., Patil, A., Zhang, Y., Ling, E., Weiner, D. J., Liyanage, D., Erdin, S., Yadav, R., Bybjerg‐Grauholm, J., et al. (2025) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2025.07.01.25330642 · Cited by 2
Zhang, Z., Zhang, S., Xu, Y., & Guo, C. (2025) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-7963918/v1 · Cited by 1
Zhou, X. D., Yamauchi, Y., Emoto, K., & Suzuki, I. K. (2025) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2025.12.11.693619 · Cited by 1
A Multimodal Single-Cell Epigenomic and 3D Genome Atlas of the Human Basal GangliaPreprint
Ding, W., Klein, A., Báez-Becerra, C. T., Rink, J. A., Bartlett, A., Wang, R., Zeng, Q., Castanon, R., Nery, J. R., Osgood, E., et al. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.02.12.705594 · Cited by 2
Genetic insights on the mechanisms of human cortical foldingPreprint
Snyder, W., Shafee, R., Liu, S., Levitis, E., Duan, K., Kumar, K., Schleifer, C. H., Bøen, R., Ching, C. R. K., Han, J. C., et al. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.03.06.709690 · Cited by 2
Сергеевич, Ш. В., & Fuerst, J. G. R. (2026) · Qeios · doi:10.32388/eo7dnd · Cited by 1
Gay Genes? Genetics and Sexual Orientation
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.011
Genomweite polygene Werte revolutionieren die Intelligenzforschung
von Stumm, S. (2018) · BIOspektrum · doi:10.1007/s12268-018-0928-3
Partitioning the genetic architecture of amyotrophic lateral sclerosisPreprint
Broce, I., Fan, C. C., Olney, N. T., Lomen‐Hoerth, C., Finkbeiner, S. M., Atassi, N., Cudkowicz, M., Paganoni, S., Yokoyama, J. S., Kao, A. W., et al. (2018) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/505693 · Cited by 1
Self-citationThe Genetic Basis of Human Cognition: Intelligence, Learning and Memory
Avgan, N. (2018) · Queensland University of Technology · doi:10.5204/thesis.eprints.122903
Investigation of the genetic basis of schizophrenia and cognitive function
Whitton, L. (2019) · Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) · doi:10.13025/15888
Verhoef, E., Grove, J., Shapland, C. Y., Demontis, D., Burgess, S., Rai, D., Børglum, A. D., & Pourcain, B. S. (2019) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/580365 · Cited by 1
Genetic Contributions to Health Literacy
Fawns‐Ritchie, C., Davies, G., Hagenaars, S. P., & Deary, I. J. (2019) · Twin Research and Human Genetics · doi:10.1017/thg.2019.28
Self-citationWhole-Brain Whole-Genome Framework for Imaging Genetics of Psychopathology and Cognition
Hatoum, A. S. (2019) · CU Scholar (University of Colorado Boulder)
Polderman, T. J. C. (2019) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2019.07.003
Self-citationSanders, B., D’Andrea, D., Collins, M. O., Rees, E., Steward, T. G. J., Zhu, Y., Chapman, G., Legge, S. E., Pardiñas, A. F., Harwood, A. J., et al. (2020) · White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York)
The npBAF to nBAF Chromatin Switch Regulates Cell Cycle Exit in the Developing Mammalian CortexPreprint
Braun, S. M. G., Petrova, R., Tang, J., Krokhotin, A., Miller, E. L., Tang, Y., Panagiotakos, G., & Crabtree, G. R. (2020) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2020.01.17.910794
Ahmed, Z., Zeeshan, S., & Liang, B. T. (2019) · IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM) · doi:10.1109/bibm47256.2019.8983389
Jones, H. J., Zammit, S., & Walters, J. (2020) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-813201-2.00010-7
Steppan, M. (2020) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2020.05.01.072348
Changing perspectives: Towards detailed phenotyping in geneticsPreprint
Nagel, M. (2020) · Thesis Commons (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31237/osf.io/a4nz2 · Cited by 1
Self-citationHolland, D., Frei, O., Desikan, R. S., Fan, C.-C., Shadrin, A. A., Smeland, O. B., Andreassen, O. A., & Dale, A. M. (2019) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/705285
Self-citationДубина, И. Н., & Bogomaz, S. А. (2020) · Economics Profession Business · doi:10.14258/epb201970
Fitzgerald, J. C., Fahey, L., Holleran, L., Broin, P. Ó., Donohoe, G. J., & Morris, D. W. (2022) · Genes · doi:10.3390/genes13010122 · Cited by 8
Self-citationThe Impact of Database Research on Industrial Products (Panel Summary).
Barbará, D., Blakeley, J. A., Fishman, D., et al. (1994)
Definitions of Technical Terms
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.015
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.005
Genes and Environments in Human Development
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.004
Genes, Personality and Personality Disorders
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.008
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.006
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.013
Naz, S., Khan, M. I., Shah, S. A., & Qayyum, A. (2021) · Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews · doi:10.18510/hssr.2021.9238
Tracing causes and consequences of human intelligence through genetic and cognitive data
Willoughby, E. A. (2020) · University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (University of Minnesota)
Pai, S., Hui, S., Weber, P., Narayan, S., Whitley, O., Li, P., Labrie, V., Baumbach, J., & Bader, G. D. (2019) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/751933
Accelerated Variability of Human Genes and Transportable Elements; Genesis of Network
Fuks, B., & Konstantinov, A. (2021) · International Journal of Genetics and Genomics · doi:10.11648/j.ijgg.20210901.13
Ujma, P. P. (2021) · Mentálhigiéné és Pszichoszomatika · doi:10.1556/0406.22.2021.002
Cognitive Endophenotypes: Powerful Tools for Modern Neuropsychiatric Genomics Research
Bigdeli, T. B., & Harvey, P. D. (2021) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2021.06.019
Ο Ρόλος των Βιολογικών και Γενετικών Παραγόντων στο Επίπεδο της Ευφυΐας
Ντόφη, Β., Niasti, K., & Antoniou, A.-S. G. (2021) · Παιδαγωγικός Λόγος · doi:10.12681/plogos.27909
Guimaraes, J., Franke, B., Beckmann, C. F., Bralten, J., & Sprooten, E. (2021) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2021.11.19.469227
Purine transport in plasmodium falciparum
Quashie, N. B. (2008) · Enlighten: Theses (The University of Glasgow)
Structural Consistency Support in an Integral Design System
Després, B., Lipp, M., Piloty, R., & Schellin, U. (1992)
Smith, B. (2019) · Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · doi:10.3410/f.735893194.793562731
Ji, R. (2021) · Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · doi:10.3410/f.739695496.793583806
Robens, B. K., McGraw, C. M., & Poduri, A. (2021) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-819641-0.00147-x
Genes, Religiosity and Political Commitment
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.010
Genes, Education and Intelligence
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.007
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.012
Genes, Food, Exercise and Weight
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.009
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.002
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.016
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.001
Faculty Opinions recommendation of Cell-type-specific 3D epigenomes in the developing human cortex.
Sharrocks, A. D. (2020) · Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · doi:10.3410/f.738832662.793581292
Rodrigues, F. D. A. A. (2021) · Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar · doi:10.37811/rcm.v5i6.1145
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.017
Behavior Genetics Association 51st Annual Meeting Abstracts
May-Wilson, S., Matoba, N., Wade, K. H., Concas, M. P., Hottenga, J., Mangino, M., Veldhuizen, M., Menni, C., de Geus, E. J. C., Gasparini, P., et al. (2021) · Behavior Genetics · doi:10.1007/s10519-021-10087-3 · Cited by 1
Kottyan, L. C. (2020) · Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · doi:10.3410/f.738406137.793577248
Faculty Opinions recommendation of The genetic architecture of the human cerebral cortex.
Konopka, G. (2020) · Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · doi:10.3410/f.737584496.793573108
Pahlen, S., & Reynolds, C. A. (2019) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-809324-5.23621-3
Self-citationBarbey, A. K., Karama, S., & Haier, R. J. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108635462.002
Alexander, D. R. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108566520.014
Speiser, P. (2019) · Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · doi:10.3410/f.736194521.793563833
Predictive Modeling Approaches
Barbey, A. K., Karama, S., & Haier, R. J. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108635462.020
Donohoe, G. J., Corley, E., Fahey, L., Fitzgerald, J. C., Holleran, L., Walton, E., & Morris, D. W. (2022) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1699579/v1
Self-citationWhy there is a large gene set associated with human cognitive function?Preprint
Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Ouyang, J. L., et al. (2022) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/hu8zp
Alfonsson, J. (2022) · Sociologisk Forskning · doi:10.37062/sf.59.23210
Rappold, G. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-04198-3_6
Cognitive aging: the role of genes and environments in patterns of change
Finkel, D., Pedersen, N. L., & Reynolds, C. A. (2022) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-821514-2.00005-2 · Cited by 1
Self-citationBruins, S., Hottenga, J., Neale, M. C., Pool, R., Boomsma, D. I., & Dolan, C. V. (2022) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/7a4v8
The road towards precision therapy for genetic epilepsies
Stevelink, R. (2022) · Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) · doi:10.33540/1102
Ajnakina, O., & Steptoe, A. (2023) · BMC Genomic Data · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1745909/v1
Concentration Investigating The Impact of Covid-19 On The Operation and Management of a Dance Studio
Salam, A. I. (2022) · Eduvest - Journal Of Universal Studies · doi:10.36418/eduvest.v2i10.626
Genetically predisposed motor bias drives individuality in vocal learningPreprint
Toji, N., Sawai, A., Wang, H., Ji, Y., Sugioka, R., Go, Y., & Wada, K. (2022) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2295275/v1
Miller, A. P. (2022) · MOspace Institutional Repository (University of Missouri) · doi:10.32469/10355/94082
An underlying motor bias shapes individuality during vocal learningPreprint
Toji, N., Sawai, A., Wang, H., Ji, Y., Sugioka, R., Go, Y., & Wada, K. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2295275/v2
هل من العدل استخدام اختبار الذكاء لقياس ذكاء الأشخاص: مراجعة أدبيات
المويزري, ف., & الجدي, ع. (2022) · مجلة التربية الخاصة · doi:10.21608/mtkh.2022.295094
ADN, histoire de nos différences
(2020) · Odile Jacob eBooks · doi:10.3917/oj.sablo.2020.01.0231
Yao, S., Han, J.-Z., Wang, X., Wang, J.-H., Qian, L., Wu, H., Guo, J., Dong, S., Guo, Y., & Yang, T. (2023) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2023.05.11.23289760
Gómez, L., Mitchell, B. L., McAloney, K., Adsett, J. M., Garden, N., Alexander, M. W., Díaz‐Torres, S., García‐Marín, L. M., Breakspear, M. J., Martin, N. G., et al. (2023) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2023.05.10.23289642
Self-citationGuo, Y., He, Q., Zou, T., Gong, B., Li, Y., Cai, X., Fan, D., & Zheng, C. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3153600/v1
Osborne, A. J., Noble, A. J., Adams, A. T., Satsangi, J. J., & Boden, J. M. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3183028/v1
The circulating proteome and brain health: Mendelian randomisation and cross-sectional analysesPreprint
Walker, R. M., Chong, M., Perrot, N., Pigeyre, M., Gadd, D. A., Stolicyn, A., Shi, L., Whalley, H. C., Nevado‐Holgado, A. J., McIntosh, A. M., et al. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3029765/v1
Wang, J., Wang, Y., Ou, Q., Yang, S., Jing, J., & Fang, J. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4596810
Wang, Y., Li, C., Liu, F., & Sun, F. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3448139/v1
Li, C., Liu, Y., Lan, Y., & Wang, Z. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3552461/v1
Nataf, S. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3616310/v1
Campos, A. S. C., de Holanda, R. M., Filho, F. D. C. D. C., et al. (2023) · Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental · doi:10.24857/rgsa.v18n2-018
Kazantseva, A. V., Davydova, Y. D., Enikeeva, R. F., Takhirova, Z., Mustafin, R. N., Lobaskova, M. M., Malykh, S. B., & Хуснутдинова, Э. К. (2023) · Russian Journal of Genetics · doi:10.1134/s1022795423090065
Ali, D., Laighneach, A., Corley, E., Patlola, S. R., Holleran, L., McKernan, D. P., Kelly, J. P., Corvin, A. P., Hallahan, B. P., McDonald, C., et al. (2023) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2023.12.07.570529
Self-citationDNA and IQ: Big deal or much ado about nothing? – A Meta-analysisPreprint
Oxley, F. A. R., Wilding, K., & von Stumm, S. (2023) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/4uc8g
Fang, T., Liu, L., Wang, T., Jiang, Z., Mao, S., & Cao, Y. (2023) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4670511
Xia, C., & Hill, W. D. (2023) · Molecular Psychiatry · doi:10.1038/s41380-023-02374-8
Capawana, M. R., Vuijk, P. J., Martin, J., Pollastri, A. R., Forchelli, G. A., Woscoboinik, G. G., Tremblay, S. L., Wolfe, L. E., Braaten, E. B., & Doyle, A. E. (2024) · Journal of Attention Disorders · doi:10.1177/10870547231219763
The Bell Curve at 30: A Closer Look at the Within- and Between-Group IQ Genetic EvidencePreprint
Joseph, J., & Richardson, K. (2024) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/jz7ku
Metadata
- Authors
- Savage, J. E., Jansen, P. R., Stringer, S., Watanabe, K., Bryois, J., de Leeuw, C. A., Nagel, M., Awasthi, S., Barr, P. B., Coleman, J. R. I., Grasby, K. L., Hammerschlag, A. R., Kaminski, J. A., Karlsson, R., Krapohl, E., Lam, M., Nygaard, M., Reynolds, C. A., Trampush, J. W., Young, H., Zabaneh, D., Hägg, S., Hansell, N. K., Karlsson, I. K., Linnarsson, S., Montgomery, G. W., Muñoz-Manchado, A. B., Quinlan, E. B., Schumann, G., Skene, N. G., Webb, B. T., White, T., Arking, D. E., Avramopoulos, D., Bilder, R. M., Bitsios, P., Burdick, K. E., Cannon, T. D., Chiba-Falek, O., Christoforou, A., Cirulli, E. T., Congdon, E., Corvin, A., Davies, G., Deary, I. J., DeRosse, P., Dickinson, D., Djurovic, S., Donohoe, G., Conley, E. D., Eriksson, J. G., Espeseth, T., Freimer, N. A., Giakoumaki, S., Giegling, I., Gill, M., Glahn, D. C., Hariri, A. R., Hatzimanolis, A., Keller, M. C., Knowles, E., Koltai, D., Konte, B., Lahti, J., Le Hellard, S., Lencz, T., Liewald, D. C., London, E., Lundervold, A. J., Malhotra, A. K., Melle, I., Morris, D., Need, A. C., Ollier, W., Palotie, A., Payton, A., Pendleton, N., Poldrack, R. A., Räikkönen, K., Reinvang, I., Roussos, P., Rujescu, D., Sabb, F. W., Scult, M. A., Smeland, O. B., Smyrnis, N., Starr, J. M., Steen, V. M., Stefanis, N. C., Straub, R. E., Sundet, K., Tiemeier, H., Voineskos, A. N., Weinberger, D. R., Widen, E., Yu, J., Abecasis, G., Andreassen, O. A., Breen, G., Christiansen, L., Debrabant, B., Dick, D. M., Heinz, A., Hjerling-Leffler, J., Ikram, M. A., Kendler, K. S., Martin, N. G., Medland, S. E., Pedersen, N. L., Plomin, R., Polderman, T. J. C., Ripke, S., van der Sluis, S., Sullivan, P. F., Vrieze, S. I., Wright, M. J., & Posthuma, D.
- Affiliations
- Amsterdam Neuroscience (NL)
- Erasmus MC (NL)
- Karolinska Institutet (SE)
- Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
- Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
- King's College London (GB)
- QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute (AU)
- Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
- Institute of Mental Health (SG)
- University of Southern Denmark (DK)
- University of California, Riverside (US)
- University of Southern California (US)
- University of Minnesota (US)
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- University of Crete (GR)
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Yale University (US)
- Haukeland University Hospital (NO)
- Human Longevity (United States) (US)
- Trinity College Dublin (IE)
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- Feinstein Institute for Medical Research (US)
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Oslo University Hospital (NO)
- Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway (IE)
- University of Helsinki (FI)
- Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (DE)
- Duke University (US)
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
- University of Colorado Boulder (US)
- University of Bergen (NO)
- Imperial College London (GB)
- University of Manchester (GB)
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (GB)
- Stanford University (US)
- University of Oslo (NO)
- James J. Peters VA Medical Center (US)
- University of Oregon (US)
- Alzheimer Scotland (GB)
- Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA)
- Zucker Hillside Hospital (US)
- Broad Institute (US)
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- ORCID
- Savage, Jeanne E.
- Jansen, Philip R.
- Stringer, Sven
- Watanabe, Kyoko
- Bryois, Julien
- de Leeuw, Christiaan A.
- Nagel, Mats
- Awasthi, Swapnil
- Barr, Peter B.
- Coleman, Jonathan R. I.
- Grasby, Katrina L.
- Hammerschlag, Anke R.
- Kaminski, Jakob A.
- Karlsson, Robert
- Krapohl, Eva
- Lam, Max
- Nygaard, Marianne
- Reynolds, Chandra A.
- Trampush, Joey W.
- Young, Hannah
- Zabaneh, Delilah
- Hägg, Sara
- Hansell, Narelle K.
- Karlsson, Ida K.
- Linnarsson, Sten
- Montgomery, Grant W.
- Quinlan, Erin B.
- Skene, Nathan G.
- Webb, Bradley T.
- White, Tonya
- Arking, Dan E.
- Avramopoulos, Dimitrios
- Bilder, Robert M.
- Burdick, Katherine E.
- Cannon, Tyrone D.
- Chiba-Falek, Ornit
- Cirulli, Elizabeth T.
- Congdon, Eliza
- Corvin, Aiden
- Davies, Gail
- Deary, Ian J.
- DeRosse, Pamela
- Dickinson, Dwight
- Djurovic, Srdjan
- Donohoe, Gary
- Eriksson, Johan G.
- Espeseth, Thomas
- Freimer, Nelson A.
- Giakoumaki, Stella
- Giegling, Ina
- Gill, Michael
- Glahn, David C.
- Hariri, Ahmad R.
- Keller, Matthew C.
- Konte, Bettina
- Lahti, Jari
- Lencz, Todd
- Liewald, David C.
- Lundervold, Astri J.
- Malhotra, Anil K.
- Morris, Derek
- Need, Anna C.
- Ollier, William
- Palotie, Aarno
- Payton, Antony
- Pendleton, Neil
- Poldrack, Russell A.
- Räikkönen, Katri
- Roussos, Panos
- Rujescu, Dan
- Sabb, Fred W.
- Scult, Matthew A.
- Smeland, Olav B.
- Smyrnis, Nikolaos
- Starr, John M.
- Stefanis, Nikos C.
- Straub, Richard E.
- Sundet, Kjetil
- Tiemeier, Henning
- Voineskos, Aristotle N.
- Weinberger, Daniel R.
- Yu, Jin
- Andreassen, Ole A.
- Breen, Gerome
- Christiansen, Lene
- Debrabant, Birgit
- Dick, Danielle M.
- Heinz, Andreas
- Hjerling-Leffler, Jens
- Ikram, M. Arfan
- Kendler, Kenneth S.
- Martin, Nicholas G.
- Medland, Sarah E.
- Pedersen, Nancy L.
- Plomin, Robert
- Polderman, Tinca J. C.
- Ripke, Stephan
- van der Sluis, Sophie
- Sullivan, Patrick F.
- Vrieze, Scott I.
- Wright, Margaret J.
- Posthuma, Danielle
- Venue
- Nature Genetics
- Published
- 2018-06-25
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 912-919
- ISSN
- 1061-4036 (ISSN-L)
- 1546-1718
- PMC
- PMC6411041
- OpenAlex
- W2809193491
- Cited by
- 1,267
- References
- 55
- Citations by year
- 2026: 119 · 2025: 171 · 2024: 184 · 2023: 152 · 2022: 161 · 2021: 183 · 2020: 145 · 2019: 107 · 2018: 39
- FWCI
- 64.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Nature Genetics (publishedVersion)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- e-space (Manchester Metropolitan University) (acceptedVersion)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion)
- Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
- University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- SUNY Digital Repository Support (State University of New York System) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Eli Lilly and Company
- Pfizer
- Brigham and Women's Hospital
- Massachusetts General Hospital
- Yale University
- University of Southern California
- University of Minnesota
- Helsingin Yliopisto
- Johns Hopkins University
- Virginia Commonwealth University
- National University of Ireland
- Wellcome Trust (108726/Z/15/Z)
- University of Oregon
- Broad Institute
- Northwell Health
- Imperial College London
- King's College London
- University of Galway
- Trinity College Dublin
- Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
- Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (452-12-014, 480- 05-003, VICI 453-14-005, NWO VICI 453-14-005, 453-14-005)
- University of Toronto
- Karolinska Institutet
- University of Crete
- Universitetet i Bergen
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
- Universitetet i Oslo
- Syddansk Universitet
- Haukeland Universitetssjukehus
- H. Lundbeck A/S
- Centre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology
- National Institutes of Health (1s10od018164-01)
- Directorate for Biological Sciences
- University of California, Los Angeles
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
- Stanley Center for Psychiatric Research, Broad Institute
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University
- Medical Research Council (MR/K026992/1, MR/M013111/1)
- Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/F022441/1, BB/F019394/1)
- Queensland Brain Institute
- Erasmus Universitair Medisch Centrum Rotterdam
- Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University Of Queensland
- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (K02AA018755, R01AA023974, R37AA011408, P20AA017828, P50AA022537)
- National Institute on Aging (P01AG008761, R03AG045633, R01AG028555, R01AG010175, R01AG037985, R01AG049789)
- National Institute of Mental Health (L30 MH104879, PL1MH083271, R01MH092515, K23MH077807, R01MH085018, R01MH080912, K01MH085812, RL1MH083269, P50MH080173, R01MH085772, K01MH098126, R01MH079800)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA037904, RL1DA024853, R01DA033369)
- National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG008983)
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (PL1NS062410)
- National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (U54EB020403)
- National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (UL1DE019580)
- National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR031990)
- NIH Clinical Center
- Jane and Terry Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, University of California, Los Angeles
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
- Keywords
- intelligence, genetic loci, novel genetic variants, expression quantitative trait loci, chromatin interactions, brain gene expression, striatal medium spiny neurons, pyramidal neurons, neurogenesis, neuronal differentiation, synaptic structure, neuropsychiatric disorders, genetic correlation, Alzheimer's dementia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, schizophrenia, pleiotropy, Mendelian randomization, heritability
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Brain, Female, Humans, Intelligence, Male, Middle Aged, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Quantitative Trait Loci, Genome-Wide Association Study
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-29, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-29 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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