Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41206934›Full record

ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2025

FINEMAP-miss: fine-mapping genome-wide association studies with missing genotype information.

Joonas Kartau, Matti Pirinen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

2 authors.

Joonas KartauInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki Institute of Life Science (HiLIFE), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, 00014, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-1248-8782
Matti PirinenInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki Institute of Life Science (HiLIFE), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, 00014, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-1664-1350

Funding

Research Council of Finland 336825Research Council of Finland 338507Research Council of Finland 352795
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

motivationThe most informative genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are meta-analyses that have combined multiple studies to increase the GWAS sample size. Statistical fine-mapping is a key downstream analysis of GWAS to jointly evaluate the probability of causality of all variants in a genomic region of interest. Current fine-mapping methods are miscalibrated in the meta-analysis setting due to variation in sample size across the variants.

resultsWe introduce FINEMAP-miss, a new fine-mapping method that extends the FINEMAP model to account for variant-specific missingness. We show that FINEMAP-miss is well-calibrated in meta-analysis simulations where the standard fine-mapping fails. Compared to the summary statistics imputation approach, FINEMAP-miss provides clear improvement when the causal variants have low imputation information or when the sample size or complexity of the meta-analysis setting increase. We successfully apply FINEMAP-miss on a breast cancer GWAS meta-analysis where neither the standard fine-mapping nor the summary statistics imputation are applicable. AVAILABILITY: An open source implementation of FINEMAP-miss as an R package ("finemapmiss") is available at https://github.com/JoonasKartau/finemapmiss. The archived version of FINEMAP-miss used for this publication can be found on Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17492622. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: is available at the journal's web site.

Indexed as

Chromosome MappingGenome-Wide Association StudySoftwareBreast NeoplasmsGenotypeHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicPolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

PMID41206934
PMCPMC12668598

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.