Skip to content

The Neurobiology of Suicide: Claudin-5 Is a Novel Biomarker of Suicide Pathogenesis

advancedInternational

Natasha Kulviwat · Jericho, New York
Gordon E. Moore Award for Positive Outcomes for Future Generations ($50,000) · Regeneron International Science and Engineering Fair · 2023

Abstract

A search for biological markers associated with suicide, using de-identified post-mortem brain tissue from 20 individuals and measuring levels of the cytokine and claudin-5 proteins.

What they found
The result, in the terms the project itself reported it.

Neuroinflammation markers and claudin-5 were both elevated in the brains of suicide cases relative to comparison tissue.

Why it worked
ResearchForge's reading of the public record — not the students' words, and not the judges' reasoning.

Human tissue work carries an approval and ethics burden most student projects never take on, and it is the reason the finding is about people rather than a model system. Two proteins measured rather than one gives the result internal corroboration.

Key methods
  • De-identified post-mortem tissue analysis
  • Protein quantification of claudin-5 and cytokines
  • Case-comparison design
  • Institutional ethics approval
What to take from this
ResearchForge's reading of the public record — not the students' words, and not the judges' reasoning. Borrow the habits and decisions, never the project itself.
  • Ethically demanding work needs the paperwork started months early — approval time is project time
  • De-identified archival tissue is a real route into human research for a student, through an institutional collaboration
  • Measuring two related markers instead of one turns a single observation into a pattern

Archive entries are summaries compiled for study. Read them for how a project was structured, argued, and defended — not as a template to reproduce. Copying someone else's project is the one thing that will end yours.

Compiled by ResearchForge from the Society for Science public award announcement linked on this record. Names, hometowns, project titles and reported results are as published. The "why it worked" and "what to take from this" notes are ResearchForge's editorial reading of that public record — they are not statements by the students and not the judges' rationale. All rights to the original projects remain with their authors; no project materials are rehosted here.