English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Genomewide association studies (GWASs) across psychiatric phenotypes have shown that common genetic variants generally confer risk with small effect sizes (odds ratio &lt; 1.1) that additively contribute to polygenic risk. Summary statistics derived from large discovery GWASs can be used to generate polygenic risk scores (PRS) in independent, target data sets to examine correlates of polygenic disorder liability (e.g., does genetic liability to schizophrenia predict cognition?). The intuitive appeal and generalizability of PRS have led to their widespread use and new insights into mechanisms of polygenic liability. However, when currently applied across traits they account for small amounts of variance (&lt;3%), are relatively uninformative for clinical treatment, and, in isolation, provide no insight into molecular mechanisms. Larger GWASs are needed to increase the precision of PRS, and novel approaches integrating various data sources (e.g., multitrait analysis of GWASs) may improve the utility of current PRS.

Polygenic Risk Scores in Clinical Psychology: Bridging Genomic Risk to Individual Differences