Cited by 150Schizophrenia research and treatmentEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorGenetic Associations and Epidemiology

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the fertility of patients with schizophrenia and their unaffected relatives

Bundy, H., Stahl, D., MacCabe, J. H.·2011·Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica

Abstract

Bundy H, Stahl D, MacCabe JH. A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the fertility of patients with schizophrenia and their unaffected relatives. Objective: We aimed to systematically evaluate the empirical evidence for the commonly held view that the reduced reproductive output in patients with schizophrenia is compensated for by an increased fitness in unaffected relatives. Secondary aims were to quantify the magnitude of the fertility disadvantage and the apparent gender difference in fertility of patients with schizophrenia. Method: We carried out a systematic review and meta‐analysis of studies investigating the fertility of patients with schizophrenia, their siblings, their parents and the general population. Results: Patients with schizophrenia had reduced fertility compared with the general population, [Fertility Ratio (FR) = 0.39 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 0.35–0.44)]. Siblings of patients with schizophrenia had somewhat fewer offspring than the general population (FR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.93–1.00). Parents of patients with schizophrenia had fertility similar to the general population (FR = 1.17, 95% CI = 0.94–1.46). Men had a greater impairment in fertility than women, both in patients (FR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.50–0.57) and in their unaffected siblings (FR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.71–0.92). Conclusion: Compensatory fitness advantage in siblings and parents cannot explain the maintenance of schizophrenia in the population. Alternative explanations include mutation‐selection balance and the role of quantitative traits.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2010.01623.x

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bundy, H., Stahl, D., & MacCabe, J. H.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
MacCabe, J. H.
Venue
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-10-20
Volume
123
Issue
2
Pages
98-106
ISSN
  • 0001-690X (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0447
OpenAlex
W1484857706
Cited by
150
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 17
FWCI
1.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
Keywords
schizophrenia, fertility, reproductive fitness, unaffected relatives, siblings, parents, gender differences in fertility, mutation-selection balance, quantitative traits
MeSH terms
Birth Rate, Family, Female, Fertility, Humans, Male, Parents, Schizophrenia, Sex Factors, Confidence Intervals, Chi-Square Distribution, Siblings

About these checks

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

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

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

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

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