Bias, Confounding, Multiplicity and Researchers’ Degrees of Freedom Combined with Segmented Publications are not Likely to Provide Accurate Estimates of Reality: A Case Study of Two Candidate-Gene Association Reports in the First Episode Psychosis Patients
Estimation of the reality can easily be flawed, hence, in order to result in accurate and useful estimates the process has to be protected from bias and confounding and should follow other methodological milestones inherent to different types of empirical observations. Candidate-gene association studies are a specific form of observations that have been rather extensively applied in psychiatry yielding valuable information on various aspects – when methodologically adequate and used in appropriate settings. However, certain flaws that may occur in such studies might not be bluntly obvious, at least not at first glance, and may pass unnoticed by researchers and reviewers. This case study uses two recent published candidate-gene association reports suggesting involvement of cannabinoid receptor type 1 and of heat shock protein single nucleotide polymorphisms in development of neurocognitive performance and psychopathology in a cohort of adult first episode psychosis patients to point-out the types of flaws inevitably resulting in inaccurate and useless estimates.
Keywords:
Subject: Medicine and Pharmacology - Psychiatry and Mental Health
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.