The strength of the current study is that we have provided a novel analysis of CNV distribution across disorders which is critical to understanding the nosology and pathophysiology of neuropsychiatric disorders, especially given the high degree of comorbidity. There are several limitations with the current analysis. The broad CNV overlap data are likely not complete as not all studies detail secondary medical/psychiatric diagnoses and often such diagnoses are difficult to make in the setting of a primary disorder. While these data may be incomplete, the broad CNV distribution analysis does have a high degree of overlap already. In addition, as described, we found fewer studies in the area of epilepsy so these data in particular may be incomplete. Also, we were not able to substantially compare the frequency of CNVs across disorders. This is hampered in particular because of potentially different ascertainment biases for each disorder. An example of a difference in ascertainment methods is that ID studies include data from clinical referrals, whereas CNV data are acquired for schizophrenia generally only in the research setting where it may be
