ArticleGenetics2024
Trait imputation enhances nonlinear genetic prediction for some traits.
Article in Genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Which RJournal of human genetics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The expansive collection of genetic and phenotypic data within biobanks offers an unprecedented opportunity for biomedical research. However, the frequent occurrence of missing phenotypes presents a significant barrier to fully leveraging this potential. In our target application, on one hand, we have only a small and complete dataset with both genotypes and phenotypes to build a genetic prediction model, commonly called a polygenic (risk) score (PGS or PRS); on the other hand, we have a large dataset of genotypes (e.g. from a biobank) without the phenotype of interest. Our goal is to leverage the large dataset of genotypes (but without the phenotype) and a separate genome-wide association studies summary dataset of the phenotype to impute the phenotypes, which are then used as an individual-level dataset, along with the small complete dataset, to build a nonlinear model as PGS. More specifically, we trained some nonlinear models to 7 imputed and observed phenotypes from the UK Biobank data. We then trained an ensemble model to integrate these models for each trait, resulting in higher R2 values in prediction than using only the small complete (observed) dataset. Additionally, for 2 of the 7 traits, we observed that the nonlinear model trained with the imputed traits had higher R2 than using the imputed traits directly as the PGS, while for the remaining 5 traits, no improvement was found. These findings demonstrate the potential of leveraging existing genetic data and accounting for nonlinear genetic relationships to improve prediction accuracy for some traits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.