Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of association studies eligible for inclusion

From: The influence of psychiatric screening in healthy populations selection: a new study and meta-analysis of functional 5-HTTLPR and rs25531 polymorphisms and anxiety-related personality traits

Study

Year

Inventorya

N

% Male

Mean Age

Ethnicity

HW equilibrium

HW χ2

HW p

Exclusion

Lesch

1996

NEO

505

92

37.6

94% Caucasian

YES

0.01

0.93

 

Ebstein

1997

TCI

121

55

29.7

74% Caucasian

YES

1.14

0.29

 

Nakamura

1997

Both

186

0

19.6

Asian

YES

1.15

0.28

 

Mazzanti

1998

TCI

215

85

35.5

Caucasian

YES

0.01

0.98

 

Ricketts

1998

TCI

37

nd

nd

Caucasian

YES

2.10

0.15

 

Flory

1999

NEO

225

50

45.7

84% Caucasian

YES

0.16

0.69

 

Hamer

1999

TCI

634

43

31.3

79% Caucasian

NO

3.85

0.04

Excludedb

Katsuragi

1999

TCI

101

61

25.0

Asian

YES

0.02

0.88

 

Kumakiri

1999

Both

144

42

24.4

Asian

YES

1.28

0.26

 

Benjamin

2000

TCI

455

40

nd

Caucasian

N/A

  

Excludedd

Comings

2000

TCI

81

100

32.9

Caucasian

YES

0.10

0.75

 

Du

2000

NEO

186

41

36.3

Caucasian

YES

0.77

0.38

 

Greenberg

2000

NEO

397

16

28.6

Caucasian

NO

4.75

0.03

Excludedb

Herbst

2000

TCI

425

51

43.8

67% Caucasian

YES

0.79

0.38

 

Hu

2000

NEO

759

62

29.2

81% Caucasian

YES

1.57

0.21

 

Osher

2000

Both

148

34

30.7

Caucasian

YES

0.11

0.75

 

Schmidt

2000

NEO

72

48

27.0

54% Caucasian

YES

0.06

0.80

Excludedc

Samochowiec

2001

TCI

126

30

23.8

Caucasian

YES

1.26

0.26

 

Cohen

2002

TCI

559

0

nd

Caucasian

NO

9.51

0.01

Excludedb

Tsai

2002

TCI

192

49

29.3

Asian

YES

2.30

0.13

 

Brummett

2003

NEO

99

32

70.3

87% Caucasian

YES

0.70

0.40

 

Umekage

2003

NEO

244

8

37.7

Asian

YES

2.08

0.15

 

Ham

2004

TCI

146

32

31.9

Asian

YES

0.01

0.98

 

Jacob

2004

Both

281

25

22.4

Caucasian

YES

0.59

0.44

 

Lang

2004

NEO

228

50

38.6

Caucasian

YES

1.14

0.29

 

Park

2004

TCI

100

0

48.3

Asian

YES

2.41

0.12

Excludedd

Samochowiec

2004

Both

100

47

41.0

Caucasian

YES

0.04

0.85

 

Szekely

2004

TCI

151

43

22.2

Caucasian

YES

0.59

0.44

 

Thierry

2004

TCI

76

0

32.8

Caucasian

YES

0.01

0.96

Excludedd

Sen

2004

NEO

415

33

43.8

Caucasian

NO

3.76

0.05

Excludedb

Bachner-Melman

2005

TCI

872

nd

21.4

N/A

N/A

  

Excludedc,d

Hariri

2005

TCI

92

49

30.5

Caucasian

N/A

  

Excludedd

Kim

2005

TCI

211

51

26.5

Asian

YES

0.06

0.81

Excludedd

Kremer

2005

TCI

730

nd

nd

N/A

N/A

  

Excludedc,d

Dragan

2006

NEO

196

0

21.7

Caucasian

YES

2.07

0.15

 

Lazagorta

2006

TCI

57

nd

45

Other

YES

3.70

0.05

Excludedb,c

Monteleone

2006

TCI

94

0

nd

Caucasian

YES

2.37

0.12

 

Serretti

2006

TCI

132

nd

nd

Caucasian

YES

0.02

0.90

 

Vorfelde

2006

Both

195

50

nd

Caucasian

YES

0.48

0.49

 

Hunnerkopf

2007

NEO

272

25

21.9

Caucasian

N/A

  

Excludedd

Joo

2007

TCI

158

44

23.8

Asian

YES

0.13

0.72

 

Nilsson

2007

TCI

196

60

17

Caucasian

YES

1.07

0.30

 

Schmitz

2007

Both

410

36

24

Caucasian

YES

0.07

0.78

 

Stein

2008

NEO

247

31

18.8

61% Caucasian

NO

3.88

0.05

Excludedb

Lee

2008

TCI

75

100

16.1

Asian

YES

2.97

0.08

Excludedd

Kazantseva

2008

TCI

301

20

19.8

Caucasian

YES

1.24

0.26

 

Suzuki

2008

TCI

575

51

28.7

Asian

YES

0.14

0.71

 

Munafò

2009

TCI

3872

44

42

Caucasian

YES

0.26

0.61

 

Gonda

2009

TCI

169

0

nd

Caucasian

YES

0.20

0.65

 

Terraccianoe

2009

NEO

3972

43

42.5

Caucasian

YES

1.33

0.25

 

Terraccianof

2009

NEO

1182

52

57.3

71% Caucasian

YES

0.87

0.35

 

Saiz

2010

TCI

404

50

40.5

Caucasian

YES

0.76

0.38

 

Present Study

 

TCI

229

45

49.2

Caucasian

YES

0.33

0.56

 
  1. HW = Hardy-Weinberg; HW χ2 = Hardy-Weinberg chi square; HW p = Hardy-Weinberg p value; nd = not determined; N/A = not applicable.
  2. a The term NEO referred to all versions (i.e. NEO-PI, NEO-PI-R, NEO-FFI); the term TCI referred to all versions (TPQ).
  3. b Excluded because genotype frequencies showed deviation from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium.
  4. c Excluded due to the ethnic heterogeneity or lack of data about ethnic origin.
  5. d Excluded because of unavailable data.
  6. e Data referred to SardiNIA sample.
  7. f Data referred to BLSA (Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging) sample.