Cited by 942Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersGenomics and Rare Diseases

SFARI Gene 2.0: a community-driven knowledgebase for the autism spectrum disorders (ASDs)

Open access
Abrahams, Brett S, Arking, Dan E, Campbell, Daniel B, Mefford, Heather C, Morrow, Eric M, Weiss, Lauren A, Menashe, Idan, Wadkins, Tim +2 more·2013·Molecular Autism

Abstract

New technologies enabling genome-wide interrogation have led to a large and rapidly growing number of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) candidate genes. Although encouraging, the volume and complexity of these data make it challenging for scientists, particularly non-geneticists, to comprehensively evaluate available evidence for individual genes. Described here is the Gene Scoring module within SFARI Gene 2.0 ( https://gene.sfari.org/autdb/GS_Home.do ), a platform developed to enable systematic community driven assessment of genetic evidence for individual genes with regard to ASD.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

SFARI Gene 2.0 introduces a community-driven Gene Scoring module that systematically scores human genetic evidence for ASD candidate genes. In an initial 196-gene set, 58% fell into “Minimal Evidence,” and publication attention was only weakly related to evidence category.

Key findings

  • Of 196 scored genes, 114 (58.2%) were assigned “Minimal Evidence” (category 4); no genes were placed in “High confidence” (category 1), while 5 (2.6%) were “Strong candidate” and 17 (8.7%) “Suggestive.”
  • Publication attention was skewed: among syndromic genes discovered more than four years earlier (n = 17), two genes accounted for almost 50% of ASD-associated publications, while the eight least attended genes in that group collectively accounted for 8.4%.
  • Almost half of genes with no or modest support (categories 4/5/6) had more ASD-associated publications than genes with more evidence (categories S/2/3); Table 1 shows syndromic genes had 714 observed versus 160 expected papers (4.4x), while minimal evidence genes had 360 observed versus 834 expected (0.4x).
  • The resource includes explicitly defined scoring criteria, downloadable data, community score additions/proposals, and staff/advisory board oversight with versioning.

Methods

  • Criteria were developed from a human genetics perspective to quantify evidence for ASD involvement, guided by three principles: use genetic variation in human cohorts, start with no assumptions about individual genes, and make active community involvement central.
  • An initial set of 196 genes was scored and annotated in a gene-centric web interface; users with a SFARI login can add scores alongside curated calls, propose new genes, and suggest modifications to scoring criteria, with oversight by staff curators and the SFARI Gene Advisory Board.
  • Attention analysis used manually curated publication counts containing “(autism OR autistic)” in the title or abstract; Figure 1 used the PubMed query “(autism OR autistic) AND (‘Gene symbol’)” in the title or abstract, and Table 1 compared observed papers to expected papers based on total observed papers across all categories (n = 1,434).

Limitations

  • Stated: the scoring system is “not entirely immune to bias”; scores are not static and will change in the face of new data.
  • Evident: the analysis covers only an initial set of 196 genes, and publication counts are used as a proxy for scientific attention; the paper does not report external validation of the scoring categories.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/2040-2392-4-36

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 8 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Within syndromic genes discovered more than four years ago (n = 17), two genes accounted for almost 50% of the ASD-associated publications.

    “Within syndromic genes discovered more than four years ago (n = 17), for example, two genes accounted for almost 50% of the ASD-associated publications.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In the initial set of 196 scored genes, 58% were assigned to the "Minimal Evidence" category.

    “A total of 58% of the scored genes, many having been highlighted elsewhere as top candidates, were assigned to the “Minimal Evidence” category.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    Application of the criteria resulted in identification of genes which despite substantial support had received little or no attention from the field.

    “Application of these criteria resulted in the identification of genes which despite substantial support had received little or no attention from the field.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The scoring categories accurately reflect the strength of genetic evidence for ASD involvement.
  • Findingown data

    The eight least attended to from this group collectively accounted for only 8.4% of the publications.

    “At the other extreme, the eight least attended to from this group collectively accounted for only 8.4% of the publications.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Almost half of the genes with no or relatively modest support (categories 4/5/6) have a greater number of ASD-associated publications than those with more evidence for involvement in disease (categories S/2/3).

    “Finally, almost half of the genes with no or relatively modest support (categories 4/5/6) have a greater number of ASD-associated publications than those with more evidence for involvement in disease (categories S/2/3).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 8
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 4
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The number of publications for individual genes is highly variable and only weakly related to gene category.

    “Consistent with a disconnect between attention from the research community and evidence in support of individual genes, the number of publications for individual genes is highly variable and only weakly related to gene category.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The number of manually curated publications containing “(autism OR autistic)” in the title or abstract is a valid measure of attention from the scientific community.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Enormous variability was observed both within and between gene categories, along with marked skewing towards specific genes within a given category.

    “Enormous variability was observed both within and between categories, along with marked skewing towards specific genes within a given category (Figure 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The scoring system is not entirely immune to bias, but evidence is examined and applied in a systemic fashion and is sensitive to community feedback.

    “Although the scoring system we have developed is itself not entirely immune to bias, evidence is examined and applied in a systemic fashion and is sensitive to community feedback.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    SFARI Gene 2.0 allows registered users to add their own scores alongside curated calls, propose scores for new genes, and suggest modifications to scoring criteria.

    “For genes already included in the portal, users with a SFARI login are able to add their own scores alongside curated calls (https://gene.sfari.org/autdb/search); these are viewable by the entire community in the form of “counts”.”
    • Also stated in: § Letter to the Editor · plain
      “Registered individuals are also able to propose scores for genes not yet included in the database (https://gene.sfari.org/autdb/user/AddAGene.do), and also suggest modifications to the scoring criteria.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Extensive safeguards, including staff and advisory board oversight, are in place to ensure the quality and utility of the resource.

    “Extensive safeguards - including staff and advisory board oversight - are in place to ensure the quality and utility of the resource.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Premisenone given

    The process of evaluating genes for ASD requires integration of diverse lines of support that are unequal.

    “Further, this process requires the integration of diverse lines of support that are unequal.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    SFARI Gene 2.0 includes a mechanism enabling researchers to provide reasoned arguments for new genes, offer alternate scores, and suggest modifications to scoring criteria.

    “Also new and unique to SFARI Gene 2.0 is a mechanism that enables researchers to provide reasoned arguments for the introduction of new genes, offer alternate scores that sit alongside existing ones, and provide suggestions for the modification of the scoring criteria.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Previous curated lists of genes implicated in ASDs and loosely defined evidence scores for entries are incomplete, non-systematic, and static.

    “Previous work has crafted curated lists of genes implicated in autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) [1-5], and in some cases developed loosely defined “evidence scores” for entries [6-8]. Such efforts are incomplete, non-systematic and static.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 8 sources checked
    • cites [1] Basu SN, Kollu R, Banerjee-Basu S: AutDB: a gene reference resource for autism research. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009, 37: 832-836. 10.1093/nar/gkn941. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [2] Matuszek G, Talebizadeh Z: Autism Genetic Database (AGD): a comprehensive database including autism susceptibility gene-CNVs integrated with known noncoding RNAs and fragile sites. BMC Med Genet. 2009, 10: 102-10.1186/1471-2350-10-102. Epub 2009/09/26 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [3] Pinto D, Pagnamenta AT, Klei L, Anney R, Merico D, Regan R, Conroy J, Magalhaes TR, Correia C, Abrahams BS, Almeida J, Bacchelli E, Bader GD, Bailey AJ, Baird G, Battaglia A, Berney T, Bolshakova N, Bölte S, Bolton PF, Bourgeron T, Brennan S, Brian J, Bryson SE, Carson AR, Casallo G, Casey J, Chung BH, Cochrane L, Corsello C: Functional impact of global rare copy number variation in autism spectrum disorders. Nature. 2010, 466: 368-372. 10.1038/nature09146. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [4] Betancur C: Etiological heterogeneity in autism spectrum disorders: more than 100 genetic and genomic disorders and still counting. Brain Res. 2011, 1380: 42-77. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [5] Weiss LA, Arking DE, Daly MJ, Chakravarti A, Gene Discovery Project of Johns Hopkins & the Autism Consortium: A genome-wide linkage and association scan reveals novel loci for autism. Chakravarti A. Nature. 2009, 461 (7265): 802-808. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [6] Abrahams BS, Geschwind DH: Advances in autism genetics: on the threshold of a new neurobiology. Nat Rev Genet. 2008, 9 (5): 341-355. 10.1038/nrg2346. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [7] Abrahams BS, Geschwind DH: Genetics of autism. Vogel and Motulsky's Human Genetics: Problems & Approaches. Edited by: Speicher MR, Antonarakis SE, Motulsky AG. 2009, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 699-714. 4

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [8] Xu LM, Li JR, Huang Y, Zhao M, Tang X, Wei L: AutismKB: an evidence-based knowledgebase of autism genetics. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012, 40: D1016-D1022. 10.1093/nar/gkr1145. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Key strengths of SFARI Gene 2.0 include explicitly defined scoring criteria, continuous updates, and infrastructure to permit community-based involvement.

    “In summary, key strengths of SFARI Gene 2.0 include explicitly defined scoring criteria, continuous updates and infrastructure to permit community based involvement.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    SFARI Gene 2.0 differs from other efforts in philosophy, methodology, and output.

    “Although similar in concept to other efforts, SFARI Gene 2.0 differs in terms of philosophy, methodology and output.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
10 of 10
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Downstream work involves considerable resources.

    “Given that downstream work involves considerable resources, a portal and framework enabling systematic assessments of all available evidence holds great value.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The initial set of 196 scored genes is representative of autism-candidate genes proposed to date.

    “Using these newly developed criteria, we scored an initial set of 196 genes.”
    “these data suggest that there exists only modest support for the majority of autism-candidate genes proposed to date.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The number of manually curated publications containing “(autism OR autistic)” in the title or abstract is a valid measure of attention from the scientific community.

    “We then looked at the relationship between category placement and attention from the field, as defined by the number of manually curated publications containing “(autism OR autistic)” in the title or abstract.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The scoring categories accurately reflect the strength of genetic evidence for ASD involvement.

    “Using a human genetics perspective, we developed a set of criteria to quantify evidence for involvement in the ASDs.”
4 of 4

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
Abrahams, B. S., Arking, D. E., Campbell, D. B., Mefford, H. C., Morrow, E. M., Weiss, L. A., Menashe, I., Wadkins, T., Banerjee-Basu, S., & Packer, A.
Affiliations
  • Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Brown University (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
  • MindSpec (US)
  • Simons Foundation (US)
Corresponding author
Packer, Alan
Venue
Molecular Autism
Published
2013-10-03
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
36-36
ISSN
2040-2392 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2168950294
Cited by
873
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 103 · 2025: 115 · 2024: 79 · 2023: 94 · 2022: 110 · 2021: 95 · 2020: 89 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 46 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 1
FWCI
8.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Molecular Autism (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Simons Foundation
  • Simons Foundation Autism Research Initiative
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH100027)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, candidate genes, autism genetics, evidence evaluation

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-06.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-06.

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