ReviewNature genetics2025
Recommendations for responsible use of population descriptors in polygenic risk score development.
Review in Nature genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recommendations for the ethical and accurate use of population descriptors: a trainee-led survey of early-career researchers.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Statistical uncertainty explains the poor agreement in polygenic scoring for type 2 diabetes.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Bridging the Genomic Equity Gap with Context-Enhanced Risk Stratification in American Indians: the Strong Heart Study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Rethinking scale in AI-driven genomic medicine - The role of small biobanks.Frontiers in 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
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The recent report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine emphasizes the importance of detailed and tailored use of population descriptors in genomic analyses, but specific guidance for genomic data analysts is still lacking. In this Perspective, we focus on polygenic risk score (PRS) development and demonstrate that population descriptors are explicitly or implicitly involved in every step of the process. Attention to this matter is both an analytical concern and an ethical concern, as each decision has an impact on PRS results and performance across diverse populations. Drawing from the experience of the Polygenic Risk Methods Development (PRIMED) Consortium, we offer recommendations for applying population descriptors throughout the entire process of PRS development, validation and application. We urge the research community, particularly data analysts, to critically evaluate and justify their choices when using these descriptors to ensure both scientific rigor and research integrity.
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.