Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30507552›Full record

ArticleStatistical applications in genetics and molecular biology2018

A practical approach to adjusting for population stratification in genome-wide association studies: principal components and propensity scores (PCAPS).

Huaqing Zhao, Nandita Mitra, Peter A Kanetsky, Katherine L Nathanson, Timothy R Rebbeck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. GWAS reveals genomic associations with swine inflammation and necrosis syndrome.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Huaqing ZhaoDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Temple University School of Medicine, 3440 N. Broad Street, Kresge Hall East, Room 218, Philadelphia, PA 19140, USA, Phone: 215-707-6139, Fax: 215-707-3160.ORCID 0000-0002-0953-4768
Nandita MitraDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Peter A KanetskyDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL 33612, USA.
Katherine L NathansonDepartment of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, South Pavilion, Perelman Center for Advanced Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Timothy R RebbeckDivision of Population Sciences, Dana Farber Cancer Institute and Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
University of Pennsylvania · USDana-Farber Cancer Institute · USMoffitt Cancer Center · USTemple University · US

Funding

Post GWA Studies in Testicular Germ Cell TumorsU01CA164947 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI KANETSKY, PETER A, NATHANSON, KATHERINE L. · 2012 to 2024
$11.7M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA164947
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are susceptible to bias due to population stratification (PS). The most widely used method to correct bias due to PS is principal components (PCs) analysis (PCA), but there is no objective method to guide which PCs to include as covariates. Often, the ten PCs with the highest eigenvalues are included to adjust for PS. This selection is arbitrary, and patterns of local linkage disequilibrium may affect PCA corrections. To address these limitations, we estimate genomic propensity scores based on all statistically significant PCs selected by the Tracy-Widom (TW) statistic. We compare a principal components and propensity scores (PCAPS) approach to PCA and EMMAX using simulated GWAS data under no, moderate, and severe PS. PCAPS reduced spurious genetic associations regardless of the degree of PS, resulting in odds ratio (OR) estimates closer to the true OR. We illustrate our PCAPS method using GWAS data from a study of testicular germ cell tumors. PCAPS provided a more conservative adjustment than PCA. Advantages of the PCAPS approach include reduction of bias compared to PCA, consistent selection of propensity scores to adjust for PS, the potential ability to handle outliers, and ease of implementation using existing software packages.

Indexed as

Genome-Wide Association StudyGenomicsPrincipal Component AnalysisPropensity ScoreAlgorithmsHumansModels, StatisticalOdds RatioPolymorphism, Single Nucleotidebiasprincipal components analysispropensity scoretesticular germ cell tumorsTracy-Widom statistic

Identifiers

PMID30507552
PMCPMC6475581
OpenAlexW2903268369

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.